A cull of pigs? Most definitely!

"A man is usually more careful of his money than of his principles."Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. 

Besides the latest furore over cash for access to Cameron, we have the news John Bercow is alleged to have made a £600,00 profit on the sale of an apartment on which he claimed taxpayer support coupled with the news that MP's expense receipts are to remain unpublished.


MilibandE promptly jumps on the bandwagon demanding an independent inquiry - one which could run in tandem with one into union financing of the Labour Party and also considers what influence has been sought, what influence has been gained, and what impact it has had. While those two inquiries are funning, how about a third into MilibandE's election as Labour Leader, one he obtained with union votes, with the same remit.


Already 'holes' are appearing in statements being issued - witness Downing Street sources who initially said it was "immediately clear" Mr Cruddas had to resign when the story first broke last night - a statement contradicted by the Sunday Times, who told PoliticsHome that they first contacted Downing Street at 3pm yesterday, when the initial response was non-committal.


When the Expenses Scandal broke all party leaders agreed that politics and Parliament required cleaning up - yet it seems that politicians are still continuing to 'clean up' in politics and Parliament. As with everything else, in an extremely short period of time this will be forgotten because another 'story du jour' will divert the public's attention - one no doubt engineered by those who have the most to hide.


That our justice system is completely skewed can be witnessed by the fact that we imprison petty thieves - and appoint the great ones to public office.

Being unable to see the wood for the trees

Returning to the subject of John Bercow and following on from my preceding post, Politics Home is now reporting that Cameron 'backs' Bercow in calling for an end to a £400,000 contract for Commons fig trees. I notice that Bercow maintains that the public will think they were being "fleeced" and that MPs were living in "another universe". The BBC have picked up on this interview and their report quotes Bercow stating, on the subject of the party conference season and the long summer break: "I think a lot of our electorate think, given that the MPs finished in the latter part of July, why are they not back at their place of work undertaking their scrutiny, standing up for our interests, debating our concerns, in September?"


When exactly have Members of Parliament undertaken any scrutiny? When have Members of Parliament stood up for our interests? When have Members of Parliament debated our concerns? As for the public being "fleeced" and MPs living in "another universe", where has Bercow been for the last 40 years - in another universe?


Finally, does Cameron or Bercow actually, really "care a fig" - as long as the gravy train continues to roll?

And so the farce continues.....

Anyone watch Prime Minister's Questions today? Out of curiosity I did and my immediate thought, after about 15 minutes, was whether a refund from the taxes that pay for this show of crass stupidity was possible. As Calling England writes (and who has the video), it was tetchy, rowdy, with neither Cameron nor MilibandE listening to the other and neither of them actually addressing the issues. In apologising for forgetting about Nick Clegg and suggesting we make up our own jokes I think Calling England's comment could be extended to cover our political scene in total.

According to the Mail today, we understand that this year Parliament' budget is to be increased to £228million, a four per cent increase on last year's figure of £219million. In keeping with the example set by the EU, it also appears that Parliament's auditors have refused to 'sign off' the accounts - and for the second year in succession. With the national debt standing at a figure in the region of £940billion - and rising by the day, if not the hour - one would have thought the political elite would set an example by ensuring they cut their own expenditure, especially in view of the Foreward written by John Bercow to the thirty-third report of the House of Commons Commission, in which he states:

"This report covers the first year of a new Parliament.......This is happening against a background of financial stringency. It was inconceivable that the House could stand aside when spending everywhere else in the public sector was being reduced."

On top of which is the monies spent refurbishing the Speakers Apartments and the £10million paid to 'retiring' MPs - both of which I consider to be a waste of public money, bearing in mind the 'special' pension arrangements that 'retiring' MPs receive - and let us not forget the past practise of flipping homes', furnishing those homes at our expense, etc, etc.

Then of course we have other costs, namely the The HOUSE of COMMONS: Administration Resource Accounts 2010-11 (for the year ended 31 March 2011) which are well worth a perusal. For those readers interested, previous years can be found here.

If Westminster is supposed to be, amongst other things, a tourist attraction, then if we have to have a national circus perhaps someone would dig up Bertram Mills who ran his rather more efficiently and economically.