I would never vote Tory, infact I am considering not voting new Labour either, however a pat on teh back for Ben, if he can do it what about ALL the other others?

Julie, Wolves, UK

Thanks to Ben Wallace the public a truer insight into the expenses claimed by MPs. He has obviously squandered money unecessarily but has shown the moral courage to declare what he has spent and has broken no laws in the process. The public must be privy to this kind of information by law. Those who are trying to block it have their reasons and this in itself is a (bad) sign of the level of corruption we can expect to be revealed in the next few months.

David Thijm, Stourbridge, UK

MP's are guilty of "benefit" fraud. NO IFS, NO BUTS. There should be a system to report MP's for this fraud.

Mushtaq Patas, Nottingham, UK

People who forget they are supposed to represent citizens, are paid more than most make pigs at the trough look good.

Few companies would be so generous and/or tolerate misuse and abuse of this kind - which some MP seem to see as an "entitlement". Bring back the stocks and place them at the entrance of Westminster tube station.

Anne, Cessy, France

To sum our country up - we are in a real mess. The gravy train, financed by public and private debt, is starting to derail. Ordinary citizens are subjected to taxes and rules from which they cannot escape. This will do nothing for public confidence in political parties and I know of an MP in another party who has furnished family members with free First Class rail tickets to London.
I have been a local councillor myself in the days when more politicians had conviction and did the job for a small attendance allowance. Now everyone wants to become a career politician and profit at taxpayers expense. I would suggest one compares a politicians bank balnce before and after they leave office. Those who have gained have not been working for their electorate!

teve Marchant, Brooadhempston, UK

The scale of these expenses across the parties shows that MP's are taking us all for a ride. Each expense should be approved some-one who understands what is acceptable and within the rules, as in business.
There appears to be a conspiracy in the establishment which often includes the media, that we do not have corruption in this country.
The level to which MP's are prepared to fiddle at the expense level confirms that as the opportunities get larger in government, they just can't help themselves. They are increasingly being caught with their fingers in the cookie jar.
Who is strong enough to clean all this up?

roger bartley, battle, uk

The following may be used in every council in the land:

Unwittingly, the Standards and Ethics Committee have opened a Pandora's Box.

In principle, those in the public eye must disclose ANY relationship
associated with their position, whether familial, or through any
formal or informal relationship.

The following applies in principle - the details will vary according
to context and application.

In every council, elected members must declare any activity of their
extended family if it impacts in any way upon council business,
i.e. a partner owning a company that provides community consultation
management services, or a relation that provides a personal political
service, or any relationship between any elected member and council personnel,
i.e. the awarding of contracts to private companies that contribute to
nulabor funds,
i.e. preferential treatment of private developers that toe the nulabor line.

Also to be declared must be any institutional, organisational, financial,
or political relationship, association or any other influence in the
appointment of any individual to any position, i.e. a community forum,
tenants' association, the police authority, chamber of commerce,
regional development agency, government department, etc.
For example, the appointment / imposition of the Dore Labour Party Chairman
( one of the richest suburbs in the country ) as the Chair of the
Lowedges Forum ( Lowedges being one of the most deprived communities
in the country ) and similar positions taken by nulabor activists.
For example, all members of an appointments committee for the Chair of
the Health Trust were nulabor activists who 'chose' the government
pre-selected civil servant and party member, or a Local Government Ombudsman
appointed both as a 'thank you' and expectation of 'more of the same'
for nulabor, or the appointment of a council chief executive as a nulabor
containment device.
For example, any links or relationships between those proposed for an
Honour and the proposers.
For example, politcal activists groomed and placed on committees such as
School Governors' Boards, Housing Management Boards, etc

The lists can go on, until the whole underhandedness of the current national
and local government ways of working are completely exposed.

Of course, those councils who are honest, open, transparent and accountable
will already be preparing such material as the above.

Using the corrupt nulabor government's own argument for ID cards and unfettered
government, council and virtually anyone snooping on every citizen then any
individual, group, council, organisation or department that refuses to provide
the information must not only have something to hide, but also be 'guilty'.

Accordingly, all are invited - especially the journos and politicos among you
- to approach your respective local councils, or regional organisations,
or national institutions, or transnational, for a complete airing of the
type of material as indicated above.

Regards

Martin

martin brighton, sheffield,

winterton must be breaking the rules if you cannot claim rent payments from public funds if such payments benefit a relative or they hold a pecuniary interest in the property. Regardless of the legality in how the trust fund arrangement avoids death duty, claiming the rent payments back from public funds is clearly in breach of the regulations governing MP expense claims.

mike, bolton, U.K.

" I happen to rent a property that I bought outright."
Why?

Pete Minns, Hull, UK

absolute scandal, and they wonder why the public doesn't trust them... makes my blood boil.

Gavin Sullivan, Cardiff, UK

C,mon this is 2008..... I live 12,000 miles away from the source of my work.

I get to swim in my pool in Australia in 37 degree heat and later work on my projects in London, no worries.

So I'm sure that being 150 miles away, need not necessarily be an issue for a secretary.

C, Australia,

It is not only the vast majority MP's that will seek to obstruct by any means possible the disclosure of their willingness to expend public funds or to be transparent and accountable for same.
The whole lumbering Westminster bureaucracy and the not so open and accountable permanent establishment, the Civil service and associated 'others' will have reason to oppose openness, transparancy and accountability with the expenditure of public largess.

Indeed, how could it be possible for MP's to have got themselves into their present position of defensive secrecy over time without the connivance of the state apparatchniks, mandarins and supposedly public watch dogs et al?

If most MP's are now under deep suspicion for their refusal to be held accountable or transparent for their generosity in the expenditure of public funds then surely those responsible for the permanent administration must equally be under suspicion for their supervision of our public administration.

Tom McAlister, Coventry,

As a local government employee, I am required to recruit staff within an equal opportunities framework. Shortlisting and interviews need to evidence that these principals have been compied with.
Why are these public sector jobs not subject to the same legislation ?

heather, swansea, uk

Nice work if you can get it.

Clive Burghard , LANCING, ENGLAND

This is outrageous! The worst thing about this is that is impossible to be stopped as the MPs are a law to themselves.
I will consult press reports to verify whether my local MP is part of this " elite". Maybe he claims an allowance for his mother who has alzheimers and lives in a care home but writes very complicated letters and Xmas cards to constituents.

daniela, bath, UK

If these people get voted into office by the public, then it is clear and expected that we the public should know what money they have access to and for what it is being spent on.
Even the lowliest office worker could not claim £250 a week without receipt evidence.

keithw, Wirral, UK

Investigate all those who do not wish to be open and honest those not wishing to do so must have something to hide

syd, Leeds, UK

Thats not a REAL breakdown - what are all the list of amunts for ?

SK, Cambridge, UK

I do not understand where the problem is. The 2006 Comapnies Act requires Directors to disclose details of their expense claims via submission of receipts. Why do MPs think themselves to be so above the law?

It is unacceptable for MPs to impose a different set of rules from those which they themselves ar eexpected to follow.

Simple. Do as I do, and ignore what I say.

Edwin, Bucharest,