Parliamentary Standards Bill

Legislation is certainly needed to restore public trust in Parliament, but this is a grossly inadequate Bill. Almost every hon. Member who has spoken has agreed with both points—except, I am afraid to say, the Front-Bench spokesmen. They, and the Government Front-Bench team, in particular, are infected with a toxic combination of pre-election fever, panic fuelled by the leaks on expenses and the public's reaction to them, and a mistaken belief that just by doing something we can somehow insulate ourselves from the political damage that has been done. That is why we have what the Secretary of State has called emergency legislation. The Bill contains serious legal, constitutional and practical flaws and, even more importantly, fails to ensure the delivery of the two reforms that are essential for the restoration of public trust. For those reasons, I shall not support the Bill if there is a Division. The two essential reforms are, first, that the setting of MPs' pay and pensions should be removed from MPs' direct control, because we should no longer be expected or allowed to set them directly by a resolution of the House; and, secondly, that the use to which allowances are put should be subject to full transparency—as much as is practicable under the law. I have been a vigorous advocate of both changes for many years, and I proposed them to the democracy task force, on which I sat. It was chaired by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Clarke), and its members included the former Cabinet Secretary Lord Butler and my right hon. Friend the Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir George Young). It was plain to us that, whatever the Senior Salaries Review Body might recommend, as long as we MPs vote on each change to our remuneration, the public will believe that we are just feathering our nests. Until full transparency is in place, the public will also continue to believe that we misuse allowances once we get them. The Bill does at least take the setting of allowances out of our hands, but it leaves salaries to be set by resolutions of the House. That is what has led to problems almost every time the Government have sought to table such motions. If we are to legislate, we should at least be allowed to do it properly so that it covers pay and pensions. I have tabled an amendment to achieve that—at least, on pay.