Land Matters

Following yesterday’s post, the letter from the Minister, Roseanna Cunningham, to the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee has now been published. Disappointingly, it merely, offers to open up consultation on the design of the forms to be used and to consider designing a separate form for re-registration. This seemed to placate members of the Committee even though it is a pretty meaningless gesture. Of course, the whole process is being steered by officials - they drafted the letter, the guidance. They draft advice, Ministerial decisions and briefings.

It is high time someone with political authority, took a grip of this situation. I prepared a review of the operation of the community right to buy back in 2007. Read it and see why change is needed.

At the meeting of the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee yesterday (20 May 2009), members agreed the proposed community Right to Buy Regulations covering re-registration. It was reported that the Minister, Roseanna Cunningham, had written to the Committee offering to re-examine the process of re-registration. This letter has not been made public on the Committee’s website and thus I do not know the scope of this offer. According to officials, there is little scope for re-examination due to the terms in which the legislation is framed.

Following my post yesterday, it is great to see Heather Brooke on the cover of the Guardian’s G2 supplement today. Her story is a fascinating (but all too brief) account of the efforts she had to go to to secure access to information on MPs’ expenses. Some of the quotes from the Parliamentary officials are priceless.

“Transparency will damage democracy.” Andrew Walker, Head of House of Commons Fees Office

Wow!

According to this report, Scottish landowners are living in fear. On closer inspection, it appears that Oliver Russell, the husband of the owner of Ballindalloch Estate, made some remarks at a dinner party at which, presumably, the “journalist”, David Nicholson, was present. So no evidence that such opinions are held by more that one individual or that Scottish landowners as a class are living in fear. I have met a number of landowners in recent months and they all seem quite fine to me.

I have also had contact with a number of politicans in a position to do the kinds of things Mr Russell fears might happen and, believe me, I see no evidence that anything further is going to happen on the land reform front. If it were I think these politicians might have mentioned it to me.

Although, maybe, just maybe, they are hatching some kind of plan.

Much of what has been exposed on the topic of MPs’ expenses is trivial. What is not trivial is the extent to which MPs have time and time again claimed in their defence that everything that they did was within the rules. There are a number of problems with this. The first is that MPs made the rules so they are in a poor position to pray them in aid. The second is that obeying the rules does not make what you do right or moral simply because you’ve been told that it within the rules.

I would not go and beat up old ladies in the street if the law said that I was permitted to do so. It is clearly wrong.

MPs receive an allowance for the costs of maintaining a second home to allow them to work in London. Putting aside the question of what costs are legitimate, the purpose of this allowance is fairly clear. What then are we to make of Andrew MacKay MP who claimed for the costs of a second home in London whilst his wife, fellow MP Julie Kirkbride, used her second home allowance to pay the costs of their main home in Bromsgrove (sorry her second home but his main home). Here’s what he had to say earlier today.

“I had taken advice from the most senior person at the time in the Fees Office and they had suggested to me that I elect our family home in north Worcestershire, in my wife Julie’s constituency,” he told Sky News.

“My second home that I claimed on is our home in Westminster, near to the House of Commons. Equally, Julie was advised to claim the main home in London, the second home in Bromsgrove.

“This was all transparent, it was all approved and frankly until it was drawn to my attention it did not occur to me that it didn’t pass the reasonableness test.”

It didn’t occur to him?

Watch him try to defend his position. Pay close attention to how he never once admits that he ever, ever, thought what he was doing was wrong. Awesome.

Amidst all the justifiable anger over the revelations of MPs’ expenses it is worth remembering that we owe our knowledge of these issues not to the Daily Telegraph, not to the person who leaked them and certainly not to the House of Commons authorities who tried desperately first to suppress them and then to exempt themselves from the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.

We owe it to Heather Brookes who made the original Freedom of Information request and who was determined enough to go all the way to the High Court in London  to secure this disclosure.

One day she may get the thanks she deserves.