Should they forfit their chances?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-119433 7/Tainted-race-Speaker-Five-hopefuls-cash-had. html

Should MPs who have been tainted in anyway over the recent expenses wangle be allowed to take up the Speaker's job?

Surely one would not be treated favourably in the Private Sector if one had such records?

[Gromit]

No one who has been found to have mis-claimed or handed back money should stand for election as Speaker.

[paraffin]

The dilemma is that we don't yet know who will survive untainted by the expenses' scandal, therefore what are the options?

In a totally hypothetical situation, wouldn't it be nice if the business of the House could be somehow suspended for 6 months, and Parliament effectively closed pending a complete clear out of all MPs until this matter is resolved? For I believe that it would take that long to sort the "goodies" from the "baddies".

I appreciate that this is totally unworkable, but I'm wearing my rose tinted specs at the moment. Once the wheat is separated from the chaff, the "baddies" should be immediately sacked and their constituencies would need to propose another candidate to instead stand as prospective MP. The other Parties would of course also be able to each nominate a credible candidate. The whole process may be feasible within, say four months, after which there would be a GE, say, six weeks later. The rest is obvious and the new Government would assume power within that six month period.

I realise how simplistic and fanciful this all sounds, before any detractors jump all over me as to why it wouldn't and couldn't work. But, as I said, I'm fantasising to say the least.

But wouldn't it be a nice way to have public confidence restored to our elected "Honourable Members"? Dream on !

[weecalf]

Why dont we have a television series and let tthe public vote for the winner .That way the public can get ripped off again by these lot .Most important we will not know or hear tell of the winner in 3 weeks .Wonder who could be on the panel J Archer and let me see

[anotheoldgit]

paraffin

Perhaps based on your idea, all this could be done during the Summer recess?

Then maybe the conference season could be used to call them up before conference to answer the findings?

All hypothetical once again, but wouldn't it make one look forward to Autumn.

That is of course if one wasn't a MP.

[Bobbisox]

they themselves are now being investigated another!!!

[sqad617]

Joy...morning.

What?

[jno]

there is a huge range of activities under investigation here, from the distinctly dodgy (claiming on non-existent mortgages) to the extremely minor (claiming on KitKats). Plus a lot involving moats and so forth which are hilarious but don't seem terribly evil to me. I don't know where the lines of acceptability will finally be drawn, any more than the MPs themselves do, so 'tainted in any way' is a pretty vague phrase. Remember, claiming expenses is not invariably wicked, and repaying them isn't necessarily a sign of guilt. My MP, I'm happy to say, seems to have claimed very little, and will get my vote again next time; but it's up to each individual voter to weigh up what his or her MP has done and decide whether to vote them back in.

[ludwig]

Yes, they should forfeit their chances, but that doesn't look likely. (what a surprise).

Instead we get the Labour whips 'encouraging' people vote for Margaret Beckett who claimed nearly �11,000 for gardening expenses. This is the new broom that going to oversee the cleaning up of the expenses system.

[rov1200]

What one forgets is when your MP chooses to become a speaker that parliamentiary constituency no longer has a representative to speak out on your behalf. The fairest way is for that MP to stand down and allow a by election to take place so you are represented.