| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
092395
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In May 2009, revelations made in The Daily Telegraph about the way that MPs had used and abused the House of Commons expenses and allowances regime threw the British political system into turmoil, forced the resignation of the Speaker of the Commons along with a number of implicated MPs, and ignited talk about a crisis in parliamentary democracy and a collapse of public trust in politics. This article explores the events that led to this situation, from the structure of MPs pay and allowance system, the Freedom of Information context that framed the disaster, and the crisis of transparency which the House of Commons has itself precipitated. It argues that, talk of parliamentary reform aside, MPs must radically rethink the way that they approach their representative role and the nature of their broader engagement with the public they claim to serve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
095287
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
There is nothing new about the existence of a political class, nor about the electorate's distaste for paid politicians. In the middle ages, voters made clear their preference for representatives who were prepared to serve without payment; in the eighteenth century, the increase in the number of MPs paid by the state, whether in salaried posts or as sinecurists, was seen as a corrupt and pernicious extension to the influence of the crown; in the nineteenth and early twentieth century the payment of MPs by the taxpayer was widely regarded as an improper and offensive idea. The current furore over MPs' pay and expenses is another example of the intense suspicion with which MPs who have received money from the state have been regarded from the seventeenth to the twentieth century.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
096260
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Using the Parliamentary Communications Allowance, MP David Drew recently conducted a large scale research project into public opinion on the British Constitution. There could not have been a better time to do so. Not only are we in the wake of severe economic and political crises, but also a period of unprecedented legislative interest in the constitution. Coordinated by Ed Leighton (an undergraduate at the LSE), the project consisted of a postal survey of 43,000 households, public debates around the constituency and workshops in local schools. The response from the public was incredible, and the results both interesting and unexpected. This article will outline some of those findings and demonstrate that large scale consultations with the public are both readily achievable and warmly welcomed. That this can all be done within the budget of the Parliamentary Communications Allowance also shows that at its best this fund can be used to genuinely engage with the public.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|