Arrogant Bastards Are How Arrogant Bastards Talk!
THE TELEGRAPH: Anthony Steen, the Tory MP forced to stand down over his expenses, has suggested people were "jealous" because he lived in a house that resembled Royal residence Balmoral.

Anthony Steen claimed claimed £87,729 over four years for his million-pound country home. Photos courtesy of The Telegraph
Mr Steen became the second Tory grandee to announce his retirement at the next election after the disclosure he spent tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money on his million-pound country home.

The MP, who spent nearly £90,000 on his second home over four years from his MP's expenses claims, insisted his behaviour was "impeccable" and he had merely been "caught on the wrong foot".

"As far as I am concerned and as of this day I don't know what the fuss is about," he told the BBC Radio 4's The World at One.

"We have a wretched Government here which has completely mucked up the system and caused the resignation of me and many others, because it was this Government that introduced the Freedom of Information Act and it is this Government that insisted on the things which caught me on the wrong foot.

"What right does the public have to interfere with my private life? None." MPs' Expenses: Anthony Steen Claims People Just Jealous of His Large House >>> | Thursday, May 21, 2009

MPs' Expenses: We, the People, Are in Revolt
THE TELEGRAPH: Voters have been treated like peasants by our so-called betters for long enough, as the MPs' expenses scandal illustrates. Now it is time for a change, argues Robert Colvile.

Spirit of revolution: the fires are not yet burning, but the public is indeed angry. Photo courtesy of The Telegraph
When Sir Peter Viggers next encounters the citizens of Gosport, there are bound to be a few colourful suggestions made about what precisely he can do with the 28 tons of manure included in his expense claims. But even if he tries to argue that the purchase of the fertiliser – or, indeed, of a £1,600 floating habitat for his ducks – was “wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred” in the performance of his Parliamentary duties, the electors will almost certainly be in no mood to listen.

Across the country, the public is out for blood. The opinion polls, the thousands of letters sent to this newspaper, the savaging of politicians on Question Time, a simple sampling of saloon-bar conversation: all reveal the strength of feeling. Macaulay might have claimed that there is “no spectacle so ridiculous as the British public in one of its periodical fits of morality” – but that was before the politicians’ fit of venality, before the reputation of Parliament collapsed under the weight of duck islands, patio heaters and tins of dog food.

Yet, outraged as the public are, it is still possible – if not, as MPs must be hoping, probable – that this passion will subside. Yes, there will be a “kick the bums out” movement at the next election, with a few bad apples forced out by their parties or constituency associations, and a few independent anti-sleaze campaigners entering the House of Commons.

There will be new rules for MPs’ behaviour, perhaps even those proposed this week by Gordon Brown; there will be an election for Speaker, in which the candidates compete to sell themselves as the toughest of the tough and cleanest of the clean. But in a few years’ time things will be back to normal: the public will lose interest in politicians’ behaviour, and it will be noses back into a (markedly smaller) trough.

There is, however, an alternative argument – that the disgust over MPs’ behaviour is part of a wider refusal to be taken for a ride any longer.

What enrages us about this scandal is not so much that Douglas Hogg had his moat cleaned, as that he used our money – that the MPs’ ginger biscuits and packets of Maltesers and mock-Tudor beams were bought at the taxpayer’s expense. Especially galling is that although the claims were mostly made in the boom years, they have been revealed in a recession, just as we are all being urged to tighten our own belts and prepare for higher taxes and lower public spending. >>> By Robert Colvile | Thursday, May 21, 2009

Peer Turns Fire on BBC Presenter
BBC: A Labour peer turned on a BBC presenter demanding to know how much she was paid during a live interview on MP expenses.

Lord Foulkes clashed with Carrie Gracie on the BBC News Channel after she asked if MPs who had abused their expenses should pay the money back.

He accused the media of ignoring the good work MPs did and demanded to know how much she was paid.

Told it was £92,000 a year, he said she was being paid "nearly twice as much an MP - to come on and talk nonsense".

He added that BBC presenters such as John Humphrys and Jeremy Paxman were paid hundreds of thousands of pounds "to come on TV and sneer at democracy and undermine democracy. The vast majority of MPs are being undermined by you." >>> | Tuesday, May 12, 2009