Accused MPs citing privilege rules

THE pathway to the truth over MPs’ expenses has been littered with obstacles, most of which were placed there by the elected members themselves. The latest twist is the prospect of parliamentary privilege being invoked by the Labour MPs charged last week, to avoid prosecution. David Cameron registered his “disgust”, but was accused of prejudicing a fair trial.

Why should people not have the opportunity to debate the privilege issue? It is a procedural matter of public interest and not a debate about their guilt or innocence. After awarding themselves a whopping, secret, unofficial pay rise, by creating an expenses’ system which invited abuse, MPs then fought tooth and nail to stop the public finding out.

All MPs must shoulder blame for allowing a system which was rotten to the core to drain public cash year after year, and that includes the leaders who are clambering over each other for the moral high ground. The public, whose trust was abused by MPs in general over the matter, are entitled to see the accused treated in exactly the same way in court as anyone else and not hide behind special privileges. These are what caused the scandal in the first place.