AS revision: MPs’ expenses

I’ve had a few questions from my groups about the significance of recent events in Parliament and how important it is that they write about it in the forthcoming exams.

I have to say that I’ve struggled to find a link in the syllabus where students would be able to write at length about what are really quite momentous events in Parliament, though personally I think the press have over inflated the importance of some of the claims MPs have made.

There is a link between the expenses story and the state of British democracy. It could reasonably be argued that democracy has been damaged by the seemingly dishonest behaviour of our parliamentarians, and that participation in the political process by the people could be boosted if MPs could be trusted and didn’t seem to be corrupt and dishonest.

It is also possible to make connections with the role of the legislature. Parliament acts as a legitimizer in bestowing authority on government legislation since it must have the approval of legislators in two houses before becoming law. At the moment Parliament’s legitimacy is being questioned and therefore public trust in the government is collapsing.

The scandal has also undoubtedly weakened the authority of the PM. David Cameron has been much quicker on his feet in reacting to this story than Gordon Brown and something useful could be said here about how power ebbs and flows within a premiership.

The role and effectiveness of MPs can obviously be questioned as well. Are our politicians really seeking to represent the interests of constituents when at the same time they can devote some of their creative energy to using public funds to treat a home a 100 miles from their constituency for dry rot?

I’ve already posted a blog about the fallout of the expenses issue and ministerial responsibility, so there’s something here as well.

In summary, candidates are not expected to weave in this issue into their answer, but obviously if they do they will be suitably rewarded!