| « Communities in Control | Regional Assemblies and the silly season » |
I was at an event last night called 'What can business teach politics about ethics?'. While, in the main, it concentrated on politics in Westminster (Alan Duncan MP was on the panel), a former councillor stood up who also worked for audit giants KPMG.
He suggested the level of ethics in local government was very high because of the rigourous oversight of the Standards Board for England, Standards Commission for Scotland etc.
I wonder how much of this can be credited to Labour's 'ethical framework legislation'? And if local government ethics are well-enshrined, and mostly working very well, should MPs look to councillors for guidance on how to act in office?
2 comments
Comment from: Diversity [Visitor]
Local Government ethics have always been checked by the steady grind of District Audit and the Audit Commission. MPs are still refusing to let their expenses be audited, even though no-one has suggested that MPs be subject to surcharge.
05/07/08 @ 16:58
Comment from: John Ward [Visitor] · http://wwwjohn-m-ward.blogspot.com/
The Standards Board is something of a side issue, as at a local level it has always been about serving one's electorate, who can come knocking on one's door at any time.
One huge advantage of local government is that the bods making the decisions (where they are allowed to, that is!) are very accessible, rather than -- in all probability -- somewhat distant and often away from their constituencies, which is the MP's lot.
Although auditing and (reasonable levels of) inspection are a Good Thing[TM], outside bodies with a non-local agenda that can override the wishes of the electorate are a BAD thing! Threats of suspension or banning from being a councillor are not for anyone beyond the local electorate to decide.
I've been through this myself, and the mere threat of a possible ban made it more appropriate for me to step down. That should never have been the case, as it goes against the overwhelming strength of support I had (and have now) from my own electors.
As far as MPs' ethics are concerned, it is fairly well known by now that MPs operate under a vastly more lax and easy-going regime than do councillors. Guess who imposed councillors' Codes of Conduct and the reat...?
Yes, at a local level we don't get any kind of expenses beyond ordinary travel and subsistence (and wouldn't want any -- and I never claimed a penny anyway!) and have always had to produce a receipt for every single item claimed. Our limit for gifts is £25 -- not the £500 for MPs. Why is there any difference?
These and other matters are why I have long considered local councillors to be a of far greater value and (as a group) of far greater integrity than MPs can ever be under the present system.
With the handing-over of many powers to Holkyrood, Cardiff and Stormont, and most of the rest to Brussels, is there really any justification for having MPs any longer?
One huge advantage of local government is that the bods making the decisions (where they are allowed to, that is!) are very accessible, rather than -- in all probability -- somewhat distant and often away from their constituencies, which is the MP's lot.
Although auditing and (reasonable levels of) inspection are a Good Thing[TM], outside bodies with a non-local agenda that can override the wishes of the electorate are a BAD thing! Threats of suspension or banning from being a councillor are not for anyone beyond the local electorate to decide.
I've been through this myself, and the mere threat of a possible ban made it more appropriate for me to step down. That should never have been the case, as it goes against the overwhelming strength of support I had (and have now) from my own electors.
As far as MPs' ethics are concerned, it is fairly well known by now that MPs operate under a vastly more lax and easy-going regime than do councillors. Guess who imposed councillors' Codes of Conduct and the reat...?
Yes, at a local level we don't get any kind of expenses beyond ordinary travel and subsistence (and wouldn't want any -- and I never claimed a penny anyway!) and have always had to produce a receipt for every single item claimed. Our limit for gifts is £25 -- not the £500 for MPs. Why is there any difference?
These and other matters are why I have long considered local councillors to be a of far greater value and (as a group) of far greater integrity than MPs can ever be under the present system.
With the handing-over of many powers to Holkyrood, Cardiff and Stormont, and most of the rest to Brussels, is there really any justification for having MPs any longer?
07/07/08 @ 22:14
Comment feed for this post
