GORDON BROWN’S authority was crumbling last night after he scrapped a vote to axe MPs’ second-home expenses to avoid a second defeat in 24 hours.
The Prime Minister pulled back from a showdown on linking claims to “attendance at Westminster” when it became obvious that the measure would fail to win backing on the Commons floor.
A second reverse – the day after the embarrassment of defeat over his “shameful”
treatment of former Gurkhas – would have been disastrous for Mr Brown’s credibility.
Even so, MPs openly compared his leadership to the dying days of John Major’s government after a fortnight of terrible headlines triggered by the Damian McBride “sleazegate” affair.
Former minister Tom Harris said: “Governments fall apart when discipline fails.
Major’s government collapsed when his MPs saw no reason to toe the party line.” And Barry Sheerman said: “MPs on all sides, but particularly the Labour side, are angry and frustrated at the way in which these changes were bounced on us without consultation.”
The latest climbdown came when the Government accepted an amendment to leave the issue of second-home allowances to the independent committee, under Sir Christopher Kelly.
Trouble loomed once Tory leader David Cameron announced he would not support the linking of allowances to “attendance at Westminster”
because it revived the idea of a “daily rate” – dropped by Mr Brown on Monday.
The Tory leadership also abstained on a motion forcing MPs to declare full details of all outside jobs because, Mr Cameron said, it went too far.
But that measure did pass, forcing MPs with lucrative outside earnings to declare how much they are paid and what hours they work.
The other proposals approved will stop MPs living within 20 miles of London qualifying for any secondhome allowance, require receipts for all claims and require MPs’ staff to be employed centrally.
Mr Brown’s spokesman dismissed as “complete rubbish”
suggestions the Prime Minister had climbed down over reforms and was losing authority.
But a claim by Cabinet Office minister Liam Byrne that Mr Brown had displayed “the smack of firm Government”
on the expenses issue was not widely shared at Westminster.
Mr Brown later insisted the “first steps” had been taken towards reforming Commons allowances.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here