In PMQ’s the other day, Kevin Barron MP – who knows what’s best for you – asked a question about MPs expenses. Well, sort of. He actually asked a question about the possible future expenses of someone who wishes to stand for election. So that’s a question about expenses that haven’t been claimed, by someone who has said they won’t claim them, in the event of them winning at some point in the future enough votes to be eligible to claim them.
That’s pretty thorough, Kevin. A commendable focussing on the whys and wherefores of something that might, or might not, happen at some as yet unknown point in the future.
The actual question, badly phrased as it is, was:
Kevin Barron (Rother Valley) (Lab): Does the Prime Minister agree that people who purport to stand to be Members of this House, and give interviews to national newspapers saying that if they are elected they will not claim expenses, and that their wealth makes them incorruptible, only for us to find that that wealth is held in tax havens abroad, are unfit to be Members of this House?
Kevin Barron is referring to Zac Goldsmith‘s comments in the Telegraph that he won’t claim the second home allowance if elected, by the way, in case that particular slight draught in a teacup had somehow escaped your attention while real life was going on and the Chancellor was telling you how we are all going to pay for the government allowing the economy to go mammaries aloft. Note that Zac Goldsmith has said he won’t claim second home allowance as he already has a home in South London, which isn’t quite the same as saying he won’t claim expenses, which is what Kevin Barron MP suggests he said. Remember that Kevin knows best though.
I’m surprised Kevin Barron asked the question though as he has been notable only for his reluctance to say anything on the subject of his own expenses thus far. Perhaps this represents a thawing of his silence? Perhaps he has finally found his mortgage statements that explain why his interest only payments went up by more than the interest rate rise suggested they should have, for example?
Kevin – I know you are my most loyal reader – as you are now asking questions about expenses that have not been claimed in the past and will not be claimed in t he future, perhaps you can answer some of my questions about the expenses you have actually claimed? Like why was your non-existent website so expensive to maintain, and who are K&R Consultants who did the work?
Oh, and if you want to explain how asking a question at PMQs about the prospective candidate for Richmond Park benefits the people you represent in the Rother Valley, then I’d be interested to know.