UK Decides: Talking Heads and Expenses Remorse

This morning I saw a little drawing of a couple sprawled on a green sofa, relaxing with glasses of wine at the end of a hard day. Sitting on a chair very close by was a large male head fixing them with an intent gaze – just the head (“untitled” by Dzama, Poetry and Dreams Section, Tate Modern, where most dreams seem even worse than mine.) The drawing sums up my experience with the BBC. I suggest the class system here could now be divided three ways - the Talkers, the Listeners and Those-who-wish-the talking-heads-would-just-shut-up, probably 90%.

This morning was beautiful, with sharp green leaves and blossom unfurling on the trees, sunlight dancing off the water and along the remnants of the medieval city wall and sturdy concrete of the Barbican. Happily the election is in somewhat of a hiatus with everyone dumbfounded by the Lib-Dem surge (although talking heads still pontificate), and this comment can stray into some background context.

The volcano has been a welcome distraction giving the two leaders time to develop a new attack plan. The Leader’s mantra during the debate of “I agree with Nick” is now changing to “What the Lib-Dems don’t know and we do.” Cameron is relentlessly cheerful and relentlessly reiterates that a vote for Clegg risks getting Brown back as PM. And that is a real turn off for voters, because Gordon B is profoundly unpopular. Why?

I am told that his appointment was an improper jackup with Blair, and unacceptable to many Labour supporters. The fact that he is a Scot is also mentioned. Perhaps the over 400 years since James 1st came to the English throne is not long enough to accept a Scottish PM. After all there is still a whole party dedicated to removing the UK from the EU and that was decided in the early 70s. More likely, however, I have not understood from NZ how furiously disillusioned voters were with the MPs expense claim saga, and how closely Brown, as the PM at the time, is identified with it.

On 7 May last year, the same date as when the results of this election will be announced, a Daily Telegraph team locked themselves away to work over the full expense claims of over 600 MPs. The information the Telegraph had was leaked from an office in Parliament that was preparing it for release following a request under the Freedom of Information Act. Preparing meant blacking out what could be exempt from release under the Act. The Telegraph team pre-empted this effort by investigating over a million documents in ten days. MPs waited in dread each day for their turn to receive a call from the Telegraph letting them know what would be printed the next day and asking for comment. The newspaper printed new stories each day that revealed the whole ghastly mess and when the official version was released several weeks later, the Telegraph could publish a comparison of the blacked out version with the “real” story.

No need of talking heads to understand these stories. Popular revulsion and anger was immediate. And as the saga unfolded and there was no escape, a great many MPs including cabinet members resigned, mostly effective from this election. The Labour appointed Speaker of the House was forced to resign by public and MP pressure, largely because he condoned, endorsed and defended seemingly indefensible conduct. There was an internal Labour attempt to force Gordon Brown out, with the resignation of 10 members from cabinet posts, but he survived.

Two official investigations followed. The first determined what money should be paid back; well over a million pounds, mainly relating to what was ruled to be excessive claims but which did not include all the over the top expenses outed by the Telegraph. Some claims were from inadvertent error but some were unbelievably egregious, even ridiculous, and these hit the headlines around the world. What we perhaps didn’t appreciate is how widespread this abuse was. Some 340 MPs from all parties had to pay back money, including both Cameron and Brown. Three MPs and three members of the House of Lords have been prosecuted.

Clearly the tradition and practice of stretching claims as far as possible was generally accepted, and the Fees Office in Parliament did not hold the line. “What we can get away with under the rules” is a fairly common approach after all, and the second review resulted in an overhaul of the expense claim system. However, it is also clear is that this happened on Brown’s watch, and he does not seem to have demonstrated much leadership in the torrid weeks last May and June.

Cameron’s first words in the first debate were apologising for the expenses claim fiasco. Brown mentioned it later, also apologising. Clegg said somewhat obliquely that there was still abuse to be corrected, perhaps implying that not all over payments have been corrected, or that not all the baddies have resigned.

I may be better able to understand why all politicians, and Gordon B in particular, are so unpopular but the election won’t be decided on last year’s news. There is a new corruption scandal brewing. It relates to banks and the causes of the recession, exposed with the Goldman Sachs prosecution. It is likely to enrage voters, and is certainly equally important, if not more so, for an economy propped up by international investment banks. Helpfully for me it is being talked about loudly in the city cafes. Basically, I think, traders were betting on the failure of subprime mortgages so in effect encouraging imprudent loans and raking it in when they failed.

At the time of writing we have righteous clichés from the main parties about financial reform but it is not easy to predict their response – except for the Lib Dems. They already proposed to change such behaviour by ruling that all banking bonuses over 2,500 pounds have to be in shares, and are about to announce more regulation policies. The London School of Economics says the bonus limitation won’t work, not because the objective is unacceptable but because it is too small an incentive. Bonuses in the millions for the last year have just been announced by several investment banks.

The next leaders’ debate is on Thursday and is about foreign affairs, no doubt it will focus on the defence forces in the Middle East. I will miss this because of attending a more important concert. But the talking heads will tell me all about it.

(occasional coverage of the UK election campaign continues…)

Margaret Thompson is a director of Scoop Media who is coincidentally on holiday in London during the UK election campaign. The election will be held on May 6th.

ENDS

© Scoop Media