Under the remit that The Committee of Public Accounts is appointed by the House of Commons to examine

“the accounts showing the appropriation of the sums granted by
Parliament to meet the public expenditure, and of such other accounts laid
before Parliament as the committee may think fit”

(Standing Order No 148).

The Public Accounts Committee, in secret session, has developed a readical new approach under Standing Order 148, which will see all Members issued with a biometric identity card.

Referring to their previous report (Central government's management of service contracts Seventeenth Report of Session 2008–09) it was noted that most of the conclusions and recommendations there could be applied by the electorate to MPs.

"1) Achieving value for money depends on effective contract management but central government does not accord contract management sufficient attention."

This equally applies to the electorate who have failed to scrutinise the expenses of MP's. After a quick cut and paste, with some editing, the new recommendation emerged:

"1) Achieving value for money depends on effective Member management but the Electorate does not accord Member management sufficient attention."

Flushed with this success, the Committee swiftly moved on to the subsequent conclusions and recommendations in order to support their chosen solution.

"2) Not all major Members Manifestoes include performance measures to manage the performance of Members."

"3) The failure to enforce financial penalties whenever Members under-perform
increases the risk that relationships between electorate and Parties are too cosy."

"4) The Electorate does not routinely test the value for money of their Members."

"5) No electorate organisation rated the level of resources devoted to
managing their Members' contracts as ‘good’."

"6) Central government organisations do not providing adequate support to their
members management."

"7) Risk management arrangements are inadequate for many Members."

"8) The Office of Government Commerce has not previously provided sufficient
contract management guidance for monitoring of Members and their Parties."

"9) The recent problems with SATS tests and Educational Maintenance allowances have demonstrated that service failure by Members can have a major impact on citizens."

The Committee concluded that the only way to secure value for money from Members as Suppliers of political representation was to tightly control their use and access to finances.

Their recommendation were simple, use existing policy decisions and have already been tested on Asylum Seekers, Prisoners, Refugees, Single Parents, Low Paid Workers and the Unemployed.

The First recommendation was to issue every MP with a biometric identity card. This would be used to access all goods and services they might need. Presentation of the card at participating Venues would enable access to accommodation. During World War II Wormwood Scrubs was used by the War Department. In 1994 a new hospital wing was completed and in 1996 2 of 4 wings were refurbished to modern standards, and a fifth wing completed. The recommendation of the Committee is that this accommodation would be both economic, secure and accessible for House Days. Other centres such as Yarls Wood, Campsfield, Dover, Dungavel, Strangeways and so on were also recommended. These are Government owned properties that would not only provide Members with secure accommodation but give them unique access to a broad and cosmopolitan range of society.

A Working Committee was to be set up to understand if other residents of participating Venues would be sufficiently representative of the electorate to form focus groups for future policy. It was remarked this step seemed unecessary as the Biometric Identity Card had been piloted on Asylum Seekers and the policy seems to have worked there.

A second recommendation was the complete seizure of all Members Assets upon election. The Committee was well aware that workers seeking to improve their lot in life were the hardest, most dilligent workers. As countless rags to riches stories attest, successful Entrepeneurs thrive in adverse conditions. Think of top businessmen and household names like Richard Branson, Bernie Ecclestone and Easyjet's Stelios Haji-Ioannou. These are the kind of tough, motivated individuals who suit the environment of no assets. Upon completion of a term of office, the assets could be returned. Nothing was found in this approach that was not already contained in the Proceeds of Crime Act and existing SOCPA and Terrorism legislation. There was some dispute about a consolidated bill before the house, but no fundamental disagreement.

There was some dispute about levels of a daily allowance until it was realised that the Department of Work and Pensions covers this requirement in the Yearly Budget Proposals to Treasury. Backbenchers and Cabinet can be assessed using JSA and Welfare to Work programme standards. Using the principles of the Flexible New Deal, Members could be rewarded with an extra ten pounds on top of benefits for progress. Quite obviously, assets - seized or otherwise - would be assessed to determine eligibility for benefits. This means testing is the standardised approach to benefits in the UK. It is tried, tested and found to be a fair Government Policy. It would be unfair to Members if they were to be failed by that system and, so, the existing Department of Work and Pensions provisions of a world class benefits system should underpin Members contribution to Society.

A further proposal of Members being compelled to do community service after two years was thought to be questionable. An election could be called at any time and that would provide Members with an onerous obligation that might not be fulfilled. As a definite vote winner with Middle England, however, it was decided that a participating Venue should be canvassed for opinion to determine if such a policy would enhance the self esteem and work readyness of Members.

Parliament and Government Finance:Recreating Financial Scrutiny Second Report of Session 2007–08, stated:

"The problem is not the House’s powers in financial matters but the ability and willingness of the House and Members to scrutinise such matters in the degree of detail required to hold the Government to account. The purpose of financial scrutiny is to make the Government’s financial decisions transparent, to give those outside Parliament the opportunity to comment, to have the opportunity to influence the Government’s financial decisions, and to hold the Government, individual departments and other public bodies to account, thereby contributing to an improvement in financial decisions and management and improved value for money in public services."

These proposals, that the Committee made, as if in a laudanum induced state, would go a good way to ensuring scrutiny is facilitated. The Biometric Identity Card would allow any Member to access the current state of their seized assets. Despite objections based on Privacy concerns, it was clear that universal access to benefits and services were only the beginning of Member accountability. By linking the Members Biometric Identity Card to an on line database, all expenses would be traceable by the Electorate in Real Time. The framework for this has already been paid for by the Identity Card Pilot Schemes and, under Freedom of Information Legislation, the information would be passed to the public domain. The proposal would substantially reduce Freedom of Information request costs and this alone could finance an additional database proposal.


The Current Committee has the following members, all charged with ensuring the Public Accounts are managed to the highest possible standard. Had they been doing their jobs properly this whole proposal would have been in place in parallel with Serious Crime Legislation, the Biometric ID Card and so on.

Mr Edward Leigh MP (Conservative, Gainsborough) (Chairman)
Mr Richard Bacon MP (Conservative, South Norfolk)
Angela Browning MP (Conservative, Tiverton and Honiton)
Mr Paul Burstow MP (Liberal Democrat, Sutton and Cheam)
Mr Douglas Carswell MP (Conservative, Harwich)
Rt Hon David Curry MP (Conservative, Skipton and Ripon)
Mr Ian Davidson MP (Labour, Glasgow South West)
Angela Eagle MP (Labour, Wallasey)
Nigel Griffiths MP (Labour, Edinburgh South)
Rt Hon Keith Hill MP (Labour, Streatham)
Mr Austin Mitchell MP (Labour, Great Grimsby)
Dr John Pugh MP (Liberal Democrat, Southport)
Geraldine Smith MP (Labour, Morecombe and Lunesdale)
Rt Hon Don Touhig MP (Labour, Islwyn)
Rt Hon Alan Williams MP (Labour, Swansea West)
Phil Wilson MP (Labour, Sedgefield)

The Current Standards and Privileges Committee were also not doing their job:
Current membership
Rt Hon Sir George Young Bt MP (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
(Chairman)
Rt Hon Kevin Barron MP (Labour, Rother Valley)
Rt Hon David Curry MP (Conservative, Skipton & Ripon)
Mr Andrew Dismore MP (Labour, Hendon)
Nick Harvey MP (Liberal Democrat, North Devon)
Mr Elfyn Llwyd MP (Plaid Cymru, Meirionnydd Nant Conwy)
Mr Chris Mullin MP (Labour, Sunderland South)
The Hon Nicholas Soames MP (Conservative, Mid Sussex)
Mr Paddy Tipping MP (Labour, Sherwood)
Dr Alan Whitehead MP (Labour, Southampton Test)

They might all well do with votes of no confidence by the other Members. This would ensure that each and every one was held accountable for the lamentable expenses scandal. It would also show the electorate if there is any difference between the gangsters to the left, the gangsters to the right or the gangsters right in front of us.