Transcript of a press conference given by the Prime Minister’s at Number 10 on 19 May 2009.
Read the transcript:
Prime Minister:
Thank you for coming this evening. Let me first of all pay tribute to the Speaker for 30 years of public service to his constituency, 20 years as an official of the House, a record of public service of which he and his family should be proud. And I think it’s a measure of his professionalism and diligence that today, after his announcement, he has chaired a meeting of all the parties to look at how we can reform the existing system of Members of Parliament’s allowances. He, the Speaker, will make a statement to the House on this very soon and he will tell us the conclusion of that meeting. And it is for him to give the details of what has been decided.
Over the past few days, I have been talking to party leaders and talking to others about some of the changes that we need both immediately, in the medium term, and in the long term. Let’s be clear about the challenges we are facing in British politics at the moment: to change the way Members of Parliament are paid for the work they do; to create a system of running Parliament that respects Parliamentary sovereignty and history but belongs to the 21st century; and to restore the public’s support and trust in Parliament and politics as a whole.
This isn’t going to be achieved overnight, but we have to start straight away. I have just come from the meeting with the Speaker and all party leaders. As we await Sir Christopher Kelly’s report, we want to take interim measures. The Speaker will announce the details of that to you, but let me tell you the approach I think is needed.
First, we need immediate changes. Some of these are already being implemented and some have been agreed today. Most urgent of all, comprehensive measures to reassure the public that all of the abuses and misjudgements of the past will be dealt with and corrected. The Committee on Members’ Allowances has recommended that all MPs’ Additional Cost Allowance claims over the past few years be re-scrutinised by an independent panel. And anybody who has made claims outside the rules will have to pay their money back. The Speaker will report on the conclusions of our discussions on that proposal.
[Political content]
Next, we need to agree tough rules to be implemented immediately to restore confidence. While we look forward to supporting the independent recommendations of Sir Christopher Kelly’s committee, today we have also agreed a fundamental tightening of the current expense rules. The Speaker will make a statement on this in the next hour or two. The decisions we have reached today are on issues of what is claimed, how much is claimed, the ceiling for claims, and of course the issues of capital-gains tax and others.
And these changes will follow the earlier changes that have been agreed: that Outer London MPs cannot claim a second-home allowance; all claims must be accompanied by receipts; incomes from second jobs must now be fully accounted for.
Now, all these changes are necessary and they are overdue. But as I said to the committee called by the Speaker this afternoon, they are not sufficient. We have to undertake more fundamental reform of the way Parliament is administered. And I believe that the keystone of any reform must be to switch from self-regulation to independent, external regulation. Westminster cannot operate like some gentlemen’s club, where the members make up the rules and operate them among themselves. If MPs continue to set their own codes and rules, however objectively they try to do so, the public will always question the transparency and the standards that they rightly demand. And MPs are currently themselves put in an invidious position by having to be judge and jury of their own pay and rations.
So I have been consulting the Speaker and other party leaders, and of course Sir Christopher Kelly himself, about where we go from here. We will set out our proposals for an independent commission to regulate the system of remunerating MPs, including any allowances that are made to them. Such an independent body would need to take over the role of the Fees Office in authorising Members’ claims and rule where claims are valid. That independent body, external to the House of Commons, would oversee and administer the new allowances system to be put in place following proposals to be made by Sir Christopher Kelly. That independent body would maintain the Register of Members’ Interests, including disclosure of second incomes. And in cases of suspected financial irregularity, it would take appropriate sanctions. Respecting Parliamentary sovereignty, it would be for Parliament itself to devolve this power in these specific matters and to put this on a statutory footing. And we are prepared to make legislative time available so that can be done as quickly as possible.
Members will no longer set their own pay, which will be set by the Senior Salaries Review Body. I believe there is a strong case for the independent regulation of allowances, disciplinary matters, administration, Members’ interests, standards and rules. And all of these are part of the consultative document that is available to you as we complete this press conference.
These are big changes. They change centuries of history for Parliament, but to move from self-regulation to statutory independent regulation is in my view the only way forward now. I said at the beginning that the biggest task we have is to restore the public’s support and trust in our political system as a whole. I am pleased, therefore, that all opposition parties have welcomed in principle the proposal to switch from self-regulation to statutory independent regulation. Every piece of reform we have made has been designed to increase accountability, devolve power and open up government in Britain. That is why we created the devolved Parliaments, reformed the House of Lords, and introduced the Freedom of Information Act. In 2007, when I became Prime Minister I set out a further agenda for change: for a Bill of Rights and Duties, for control of party funding, for constitutional renewal.
Now I believe we need to look much more deeply at how Parliament works so that it functions as an open, transparent, modern Parliament in which the British people can have not just trust but have pride. And we cannot do this just in Westminster. It must be a process that engages citizens themselves, people of all parties and none, of all faiths and no faith, from every background and every part of the country. And we will come forward with proposals in the coming weeks for how we can take this forward.
In the meantime, we know that the best antidote to public cynicism is for MPs to get out into their local communities and to hold themselves to account. And I encourage every MP over the recess to do town-hall meetings, surgeries, canvassing, to do whatever it takes to engage the public in this necessary debate about how our politics is working and to what ends it serves.
The task is now urgent because at precisely the moment when the public need their politicians to be focused on the big issues - fighting back against the recession, safeguarding the health service, delivering excellent education, cracking down on crime - the subject of politics has become politics itself. So we must debate reform with speed and strength and determination. But as we do so, I make this pledge to the public: in bringing about change, we will be seeking to serve you better, to clean up politics fast so that we can focus once again on British jobs, on British business, and getting British families the support they need, so that people can get on with ordinary life in what have been extraordinary times.
Thank you. I am very happy to answer any questions.
Question:
Prime Minister, thank you very much. What do you say to those who fear that the Speaker has been made a scapegoat for individual MPs’ failings and the collective failure of the Commons to reform itself?
[Political content]
Prime Minister:
As far as your more general point is concerned, the debate is about how Parliament runs itself. Some people want to make the debate about other things and about other issues. Surely the debate is this: that over centuries, and recently over decades, systems have built up, procedures have grown - in the House of Commons in particular but also in the House of Lords - that are more reminiscent of gentlemen’s clubs in the 19th century than they are of what real politics has to be about in the 21st century.
There has to be transparency, there has to be proper audit, and now I am saying you have to move - like almost every other public organisation has done in the past few decades - from being self-regulated - in other words you make your own rules, you make your own judgements, you make your own discipline - to being independently and statutory regulated.
Now, that is the way forward to deal with the problems of the political system. These are problems. Yes, MPs have made very bad mistakes and they will have to be disciplined and punished where that is the case. Yes, also the system has not been reformed properly and that has been a matter that the House of Commons has been jealous in guarding for itself over these past few decades. Now, we have to take the big step.
The only way of solving the expenses problem and the other problems that are related to that for the long term is to move from just regulating yourselves to being independently and statutory regulated. And that is why I am pleased that when I put the proposals in the papers to the other party leaders over the past few days, I think there is a general view that in principle this is the right thing to do. We will hold very detailed consultations on specific matters over the next few days. We want to move ahead with legislation where we can get agreement over the next period of time so that a new system is in place. The Speaker obviously, who is going to be elected, will be part of the system but really the Speaker’s responsibility in relation to a whole series of issues in the House of Commons will be moved to the independent commission.
[Political content]
Question:
Prime Minister, the criticism from voters who are contacting us is that you may well have sacrificed a couple of sheep, but you are not dealing with the people who are close to you. The people within the Cabinet, who have clearly been accused of abusing the system and of abusing the tax regime, are still in post. And you are showing no leadership in not sacking them.
Prime Minister:
I have been very clear that where a Minister has questions to answer, he has to step down. [political content] But I think everybody knows me here; if behaviour is unacceptable and I do not believe it falls within the rules, then action will be taken.
[political content]
Question:
Non-payment of capital-gains tax, Hazel Blears? That is unacceptable, surely?
Prime Minister:
Hazel Blears has paid the money back. She has done so on the advice of me and other people, but she has not broken the law and she has not broken the rules of the House of Commons. It is unacceptable behaviour and she has accepted it is unacceptable behaviour.
Question:
Prime Minister, David Cameron is calling for an immediate general election. I appreciate you are focused on dealing with the economy, but the question has to be asked whether you would consider an election now. If not, would you be prepared to state your intentions?
Prime Minister:
Let’s just be clear what the problem is. The problem is Parliament. The problem is what has happened in Parliament. The solution to this is to clean up the system. What we are trying to do with these proposals, I have been working for some days on this, the switch from a self-regulated system to a statutory system is quite fundamental and the change that has to be made is in the system. Take a few MPs out, take a few people out: you still have the problem of the system. The system has to change. It is a problem of Parliament as a whole, and those people who somehow believe that this can be sorted out just by a few names changing on a few name plates are wrong.
It is the system itself that has to change. [Political content] I am taking responsibility for making sure that the system is cleaned up, and the proposals I am putting to have statutory regulation mean that the whole issue of remuneration, expenses and everything else is going to be dealt with by an independent body, not by the self-regulation of the past.
Question:
Prime Minister, I think you said that everyone had agreed on the principle of what you are proposing in terms of Parliament no longer being in charge of all this. Are you saying tonight there is in effect a blueprint agreed that this will no longer be run by Parliament? It will be taken out to an independent body and that all the parties have agreed on that. If they have, where does that leave Sir Christopher Kelly’s report, for instance?
Prime Minister:
We have been discussing this over the past few days with large numbers of people. We have prepared a paper, which I don’t know if you have already got but it is certainly available and will be circulated. That paper sets out how we can move from Parliament making these decisions to independent statutory regulation, to move from self-regulation to statutory regulation. Today, and the Speaker will reflect it when he makes his statement, we had a discussion of these issues at the meeting that all parties were represented at. I think it is true to say that all parties in principle accept that this is the right thing to do. I think the next stage after these discussions is to go into detail about the specific legislative measures that would have to be taken. I would like this to happen quickly, but of course I want to do it on a consensual basis involving all parties.
But make no mistake about it: if Parliament goes ahead with the changes that I am proposing, then the practices of the last years that have so discredited Parliament could not be as a result of decisions made by MPs themselves and could not be guaranteed by a self-regulatory system. You move to statutory regulation, which is the only way to solve this problem.
Question:
Just to clarify, if I was caught shoplifting in Harrods and then said ‘Sorry, I am going to pay because I was caught’, that does not stop them prosecuting me. Yes, someone like Hazel Blears paid it back. Did she just get away with it?
Prime Minister:
I just want to say it was totally unacceptable behaviour. I do not support it. It is inappropriate for people to do it, but it is not - as you will know probably by looking at it in detail - either against the law or against the rules of the House at the moment. That is why we are discussing the changes that we are doing.
[Political content]
Question:
Many voters think that the only reason that changes are now going to be made to the system is because MPs have been caught out. Can you honestly say that voters are wrong about that?
Prime Minister:
I am very glad that you asked that question, because I think you have to look back and although there was some controversy about it at the time, it was me that referred this matter first of all to the Committee on Standards in Public Life, long before there were any revelations in the Daily Telegraph or any other newspaper. And it was me that put forward proposals to the House of Commons before there were any revelations saying that something had to be done about these very issues. And I put proposals on Members’ allowances, on second homes, about London residents. I put forward proposals about Members’ employment of staff and about expenses and receipts that had to be provided.
Now, this was done some time ago. It may be that some people have forgotten that, but I put forward the proposal that the Committee on Standards in Public Life - look at it. And I also put forward the proposals that were voted on by the House only a few weeks ago. Now we recognise that we have to do far more, and that is why we are agreed that far more should be done. And I hope that the proposals I am putting about this principle change from self-regulation to there being statutory regulation begins to see how Parliament can solve a problem that has really been there potentially for many, many decades.
Question:
I’m going to change the topic quickly. Demonstrators in Parliament Square have cost the British taxpayer £8 million thus far. Some blame the Tamils for causing the disruption, but they defend their actions, saying their families are dying, and they can’t stop until the British government helps. How does the government defend itself? What is being done to sort out the situation here and in Sri Lanka?
Prime Miister:
First of all, I do defend the rights of people to assemble for peaceful demonstration. That it is a right in our constitution, a right of liberty for the individual, the right of freedom of assembly that we wish to defend.
I have talked to the President of Sri Lanka in the last day. I’ve told him that he must begin a political process for involving the Tamil people and other communities in his country. I have offered humanitarian aid, but asked him to ensure that displaced persons are given the humanitarian aid that they need urgently. This is potentially a humanitarian problem of very high proportions, large numbers of displaced persons, and I believe that it’s the duty of the Sri Lankan government to show that all the needs of all the people are being taken into account. And we will certainly provide humanitarian aid, but the duty and responsibility lies with the Sri Lankan government.
Question:
And in Britain?
Prime Minister:
In Britain I’ve defended the right of people to demonstrate. Thank you.
Question:
Prime Minister, as I understand it, the taxpayer paid for your satellite sports TV package. Do you think in retrospect that was a correct charge on the public funds and will you be thinking about paying any of your expenses back?
Prime Minister:
I think all of us have got to reflect on what is the best system for the future. Look, you can say someone has a big mortgage, they claim that mortgage, someone has a very small mortgage or no mortgage at all; the whole system was supposed to account for the costs of living in two places at once. And certainly the costs of living in two places at once include many things that you have in one place but you wouldn’t otherwise have in another place. We’ve all got to look at this, but I’m not going to make judgments on individual MPs. I believe I’ve done the right thing.
Question:
Going back to the question of an early election, you made the point that you think it’s the system that’s at fault, but, of course, surely it was MPs themselves - the individual sitting MPs - who themselves had the freedom of choice whether to play that system or not. So changing the system surely won’t answer the problem. Surely it’s right that, in addition to changing the system, you need to get, as you’ve said yourself, MPs to go back to their constituents and hold themselves to account. And that would call for an early general election. The Sun’s campaign has got 10,000 people in one day so far calling for this. Why do you say to them it’s not right for a general election now?
Prime Minister:
I’m very surprised you say changing the system will not sort out the problem.
Question:
Excuse me. I did say that surely it would be changing the system and changing the MPs.
Prime Minister:
Sorry. What we’ve got to do is sort out the system in Parliament. [political content] It’s got to be sorted out by all MPs coming together to reform and change the operation of the system.
Now, if I were The Sun, I would campaign to make changes in the system itself. I am making changes in the system - I’ve already announced huge changes that have been passed through Parliament in the way that London Allowances, the way that grace-and-favour homes worked, the way that the expenses system worked in terms of receipts. You will find that the Speaker is announcing further changes that have been agreed by all the parties, that are interim changes until we get the Kelly report.
I am also announcing today, and I thought you might be interested in this as well, a change from self-regulation, which you cannot defend, where MPs make their own decisions and operate their own rules, to statutory independent regulation. Now, I would have thought that’s the best campaign to be in on at the moment - that we change the system so that, whoever is in Parliament, the system cannot be abused again, and, whoever is a Member of Parliament for any particular constituency, the system has been fundamentally reformed so these things can’t happen again.
Some are making the issue the government and not Parliament; some are making the issue one or two people in Parliament, rather than the rules and the systems that operate. Where people have broken the rules, they should be punished and disciplined. Where a payback is necessary, it should be done. But let’s be absolutely clear that you clean this up once and for all by reforming the system, and doing it in the fundamental way that I’m suggesting.
Question:
Prime Minister, you’ve known the Speaker for more than 25 years. What is your feeling on watching him being humbled like this? Why do you think he had to step down? And do you think snobbishness played any part in it?
Prime Minister:
The Speaker has given decades of public service. He has been honoured by the House of Commons by being elected as their Speaker. He has made his own independent decision to retire from that office.
The Speaker, of course, is under many, many pressures. He’s got to make sure that all sections of the House have their voices heard. I think that, in reflection, people will want to thank the Speaker for what he’s done. I think it is a measure, as I said earlier, of his professionalism and diligence that, even in a day where he has resigned, or announced his resignation as Speaker of the House, he’s been able to convene a meeting of all the parties, reach agreement, and then go on, as he will do, to make a statement on that agreement showing that he is part of the reform that is needed in Parliament so that Parliament cleans itself up.
I think there’s been a lot of coverage in the media about Speaker Martin. I think on reflection people will say that some of the reforms that are being brought about are now being pushed forward by the decisions that he himself has made.
[Political content]
Question:
Prime Minister, how much damage do you think has been done to Britain’s standing in the international community by the behaviour of some MPs and some ministers in your government on the expenses question? And do you feel that you will have any moral authority in future when you are saying to the leaders of third-world countries that they must practice good governance in order to get assistance?
Prime Minister:
I will continue to say to every country in the world that it’s important to have an open, transparent political system. And where countries have had to face up to these problems, you can go round the world and you can look at different times and different decades because things have been either exposed or things come to light that have got to be dealt with, the system has to be cleaned up.
I just explained why this has never been a matter for government before; it’s been a matter for Parliament to deal with these things themselves. Now our proposal is to move from self-regulation to statutory independent regulation. I believe that that helps sort things out, and I think people will see us acting quickly and decisively, and not just papering over the cracks by a few small changes, but making a dramatic change from simply having a self-regulated system to having one where you have independent statutory regulation.
Now, that will cover remuneration, so MPs’ pay is under that; it will cover expenses, so MPs’ expenses are under that; it will cover the disciplining of MPs where they’ve broken the financial rules, so that will also be covered under that. So you move completely from self-regulation to statutory regulation. That is the right way to show the world that when a problem is identified, you deal with it and you deal with it by radical surgery. And radical surgery is what we’re proposing.
Question:
Putting it in another way, I don’t know if you would like it - I really don’t know - but if you were a foreign correspondent and you had limited airspace, how would you do the damage limitation to convince the audience there isn’t a ruinous image breaking of parliamentary democracy, and the truth, and the honesty that should emanate from Whitehall and Number 10 and Westminster?
Prime Minister:
Well, from Number 10 and Whitehall, and I hope from Westminster, you will see a determination to clean up the system. Whenever abuse has been discovered, action will be taken. Whenever rules have been broken, we will rectify the situation. Now that we’re changing the rules so that we have a statutory regulated system, then MPs will no longer be able to decide for themselves issues that were previously a matter simply for MPs and an old boys’ club to decide.
So, we are taking decisive action to clean up the system. I hope when you look at the proposals and you see how big a shift it is from Parliament for centuries being in charge of its own affairs to Parliament voting to have someone else to independently and on a statutory basis regulate and supervise its behaviour, that is the only way that I can see for this problem to be resolved. The quicker we do it, the better. And I’m grateful that all parties are interested in supporting such a proposal.
Question:
Prime Minister, you’ve said that an antidote to cynicism would be for MPs to go back to the town halls and debate with people. Wouldn’t it in reality be an early general election? And, in denying people that, aren’t you denying them the right to kick out MPs who failed them by abusing the expenses system?
Prime Minister:
Look, you’re making that an issue about government. And it’s an issue about Parliament. I just repeat this: it’s an issue about whether the system can be reformed.
You can change your Members of Parliament, and that is people’s right to do so at the time of a general election, but you’ve got to change the system, and the system has got to be changed now in my view. And I want to make sure that the system is changed quickly. If you identify the problem as being that the system itself - and some of the MPs have acted badly - but the system itself needs fundamental reform, then you go out and change the system. And that’s what we’re going to do.
Question:
Mr Prime Minister, has the recent political crisis provided any welcome relief to you, given the financial crisis we have been experiencing, or are you yearning for the days when recession hogs the headlines?
Prime Minister:
Well, hold on, I think people want us to get on with the job of improving the growth in our economy, getting our economy back to a position where we’re creating more jobs, getting small business into a position where it has the money that it needs, the loans and facility it needs.
And so I just tell you that this is a very important issue that I’m dealing with at the moment, but my attention has not diverted one minute from the importance of the economic issues that face our country. And I think you will see that we’re doing everything in our power to help people who have got problems with mortgages, to help people who have got problems with jobs, helping certain industries and sectors who have got specific problems that need support. And we will continue to do that, and my focus is on that and will continue to be on that.
Question:
Prime Minister, you mentioned earlier that you’ve known for some time that this was a culture that needed change. You said yourself you put forward proposals to have that change. Was it a mistake that at the beginning of your prime-ministership that you didn’t make that change, that culture change, a priority?
Prime Minister:
I’ve just got to tell you, the minute I became Prime Minister I put reforms to the House of Commons for the governance of Britain, and we ended the Royal Prerogative in a whole series of areas. We moved executive power into Parliament. We gave Parliament more authority over its own affairs and, of course, we are looking at a Bill of Rights, and there’s a consultation document on that as well, so we are interested in how people can see government as more accountable to them.
But what, of course, we now realise is that some of the problems in the parliamentary system, in the running of Parliament, have got to be dealt with. I just repeat: traditionally, no Prime Minister would involve himself in that.
Question:
It was about the culture that needed changing - that was the question really.
Prime Minister:
Let me finish. Traditionally, no Prime Minister has involved himself in that. I’m the first to put motions myself to the House of Commons to change that system because I wanted to see a change before there were any revelations about expenses. I knew that these changes needed to be made, and first of all I put the proposal to the Committee on Standards in Public Life some weeks ago, indeed months ago.
Question:
Prime Minister, people vote for politicians, for individuals, and not for systems. Clearly, Britain, like the rest of the world, is going through a lot of issues with the economy and everything else, I mean, the legitimacy, or the lack of legitimacy for your government, and not just your government but for politicians across the board here, is quite bad. Can this government truly deal with the big issues of the day when it is taking on the expenses issue?
Prime Minister:
Of course. I’ve just had a meeting of the Business Council for Britain. This morning I had a meeting with all the major small businesses in our country who are doing innovative things. So much of my time today has been spent on dealing with economic matters.
Yesterday, as many people know, I was at Wembley to see the launch of the 2018 World Cup bid. I was involved in the launch of our car scrappage scheme to encourage 300,000 people over the course of the next year to buy cars.
The economic work, and all the other work of the government, goes forward. We are absolutely determined to move this country quickly out of recession. Now, the press’s attention may for the last few weeks have moved to simply politics, but I know that the country’s determination is that we also make sure we come out of the recession quickly, make sure our public services are in a good enough state for people who depend upon them, and do what we can to create jobs. So my attention on that is not going to waver. My attention on that is something that has been the focus of what I’ve done over the last year.
Question:
Prime Minister, you talked about radical parliamentary reform, but actually you’re only talking about one aspect of the work of Parliament. And some people have said, at this time when there is so much focus on Parliament, and so much distrust in Parliament, it might be a good time to think about other, much broader reforms, such as electoral reform, Lords reform, looking at the way select committees work and so on. You haven’t mentioned any of that today. What do you think of that argument?
Prime Minister:
Well, you’re absolutely right. I mean, the government’s constitutional agenda is very broad indeed. We have published a paper recently on electoral reform issues. We have published proposals on the House of Lords and some fundamental reforms that can be made in the House of Lords.
I am myself very interested at the moment in how Parliament can be made accountable to the people of this country between elections. At the moment, if you are citizen in Britain, you’ve got the right to take the government or the administration to court, and you’ve got the right to vote. Can we find more means by which Parliament can be more accountable to the people?
So, yes, you’re right, the agenda is broader than simply making the parliamentary system statutory, giving it a statutory function for remunerating MPs and everything else. But at the same time, we haven’t forgotten these issues, and I raised some of them when I made my initial remarks today. I think over time, you know, interest wanes and waxes in constitutional reform, but, over time, in a system like ours, the only way of moving forward is that your executive and your legislature is made more accountable to the people. And that is what we’re trying to do.
Question:
Changing the topic, India has recently elected its new government. My question to you is: what is the UK looking forward to in terms of its relationship with India? And how are you going to help India on the question of terrorism?
Prime Minister:
Well, let me first of all say that I want to welcome, to congratulate Prime Minister Singh, who is now re-elected as Prime Minister. He is a very good friend of mine. He’s done a huge amount of work, not only in India but around the world, in promoting economic growth and the relief of poverty.
I recognise that India’s difficulties arise from the Mumbai bombing and what that has done, and the action that has got to be taken as a result of that. I hope we can have better and more secure relationships between India and Pakistan. I hope I can play my part in persuading Pakistan to focus more on the terrorist issues within its own borders. And I know that there will be general support for what I’ve called a regional strategy, where we deal with the crucible of terrorism, which is the south of Afghanistan and those parts of Pakistan that are controlled by, or are in the hands of, the Pakistan Taliban and al-Qaeda. So I believe we can make progress over the next period of time.
Question:
You keep saying the system’s at fault.
Prime Minister:
Sorry, I didn’t say that. I said MPs had made terrible mistakes themselves, and they’ve got to be punished and disciplined. But I also say that the system itself is not good enough, and any question that has come from the audience this evening or the press recognises that there are flaws in the system that have got to be addressed.
Question:
I understand that. But we don’t vote for a system. We don’t even vote for parties. We vote for individual MPs. And the problem a lot of people have in this country tonight is that they’re very angry with the individual decisions taken by their individual MPs. Now, whatever you may be rightly doing to reform the system, do you not understand there is an argument that, at some point, not necessarily now but perhaps before the end of the year, people need to feel they have the right to sit in judgement on those MPs?
Prime Minister:
The people will when the general election comes. Let’s just be clear about this: a few MPs have made terrible mistakes and they will pay a very heavy price for this, because transparency is the means by which all these things are known.
MPs have themselves been part of a parliamentary system that has not cleaned up the allowances system when people have exposed that it needs to be done. We are now taking the measures to clean up this system. This is a problem that is obviously where individuals - and I don’t want to be misunderstood on this, and some people I think are making a mistake when I say individuals are to blame.
They’ve got to take personal responsibility for their own failings, and let us not take away from the fact that some individuals have made very bad mistakes in what they’ve done and that is being exposed and, of course, people will have to pay the price for that. But, at the same time, I think everybody recognises that this is a failure of the system. Let’s clean up the system. [political content] It is not just the House of Commons; there are changes that have got to be made in the House of Lords as well. And let me just be clear that the proposals I’m putting forward would affect the House of Lords as well as the House of Commons. Okay, thank you all very much.
delicious
digg
facebook
