MPs' expenses

Let’s call the new game Fiddleum and it can be played by any number of MPs, Lords and Speakers with the taxpayer as the Banker.

We could have penalty squares with the titles of Fraud, Police Investigation, Go to Jail, Meet the Tax Man, Mathematical Error, Caught Out and Embarrassed, Pay Back False Mortgage Claim, etc.

There could be Take a Chance and claim for Maltesers, etc, but there would be No Community Chest as MPs are only out for themselves.

For Bonus squares we can have claims granted for Following our Rules, Horse Manure, Hanging Baskets, Furniture, Dog Food, Carpets, Television, Toilet Roll Holder and a jackpot of Flipping Residences.

The winner could be decided on whichever player bankrupts the Banker. This game could be issued, naturally free of charge, to each MP on their induction into Parliament.

L Hume, Darlington.

THERE has been a tremendous furore over MPs’ abuse of taxpayers’ money and rightly so.

It is a pity those MPs not guilty of riding the gravy train will be tarred with the same brush as the guilty ones.

The European elections on June 4 will be the first test of the public response to this shabby affair. The minor parties should, surely, improve their numbers, but to what avail?

The EU is another monetary monstrosity and it will be almost impossible to bring it to book.

All that apart, it is now clear the bankers, or most of them, have escaped almost scot-free after their cavalier adventures with investors’ cash.

The MPs’ lack of integrity is nothing compared to the massive tax evasion which is so rife in the City. Since most of these faceless felons are no doubt on the right of politics, can we trust Conservative leader David Cameron, if elected, to excise this cancer from the body politic of our country? That remains to be seen.

Hugh Pender, Darlington.

CONSERVATIVE MP Ann Widdecombe was interviewed on one of the news programmes last Sunday and it was obvious that she, like many other MPs, has just not got it when it comes to the public and politicians’ expenses.

She was talking about the forthcoming inquiry being carried out by a political appointee into MPs’ expenses and how we should all wait until it is finished and has been discussed by the same MPs it is being held about.

The public doesn’t want the present group of politicians either saying they accept it or disagree with it; they want an outside body saying what all MPs can claim as being necessary to carry out their duties and if they want to improve any property they buy they do it out of their own pocket, not the public purse.

Over the past 30 years we have seen politicians lower the title of “Honourable” from something which brought respect to one of scorn. How politics have changed for the worse.

Peter Dolan, Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham.

I WOULD urge correspondents to regain a sense of proportion over the MPs’ expenses issue. The sums involved are not vast: they’re chicken feed compared with what bankers and company directors pay themselves (For what? Certainly nothing resembling work).

Even if you confine comparisons to the public sector, an MP’s regular wage of £60,000-plus is nothing special.

Senior civil servants, I would guess, get about £200,000, and MPs, unlike senior civil servants, do have work and responsibilities.

No, if it’s a soft, easy lifestyle you’re looking for I would advise you to become not an MP, but a senior civil servant. All you need is a super-sized ego and an under-sized conscience.

Tony Kelly, Crook, Co Durham.

NOW that reforms are being proposed to put the brakes on MPs’ gravy train expenses let us see how long it takes for them to vote themselves a large salary increase. There is no doubt they will not lose out.

Would it not be a good idea to make any MPs’ financial increase self-financing?

To start with, how about a large reduction in the number of MPs? Do we really need so many MPs for such a small country?

WE Wade, Belmont, Durham.