Crikey - it feels like the height of the MPs' expenses scandal all over again. Back when the Telegraph was publishing new revelations every day, the working week became a bit distorted at the TPA - work would finish at the normal time and then kick off again after the 10 o'clock news, responding to the latest shockers.
So it has been tonight, with the leaking of parts of Sir Christopher Kelly's forthcoming proposals on reforming MPs' expenses. The difference is that instead of being faced with a new bit of bad news, as we so often were in those giddy duck house days, this is mostly good news for taxpayers.
At this point, I should note that this is only a partial leak of Kelly's report so far as I can see. It only covers some of the expenses issues he was investigating, and there is as yet no mention of the administrative and procedural matters such as transparency which are so crucial.
That said, what we have heard is pretty good, and mostly in line with what we at the TaxPayers' Alliance were recommending.
Family Members: Kelly rightly proposes that MPs should not be allowed to employ family members. Even if an MPs' spouse or child is an untrammeled genius, this practice is so drenched in suspicion that it is unacceptable.
Second homes: Kelly is apparently banning mortgages outright, and thus banning the prospect of MPs making a capital gain on their second home. This is welcome and long overdue, though his suggestion of renting houses is a more open ended and thus expensive option than our preferred plan of housing Members in the Olympic Village.
Outer London MPs: If Sir Christopher gets his way, MPs whose constituencies are within a "reasonable distance" of London will get no second home. We await, of course, the definition of "a reasonable distance", but the sight of Outer London MPs building up unnecessary property portfolios while their constituents commute daily must be ended.
Inner London MPs: The proposal that those London MPs who currently aren't allowed second homes should have their London bonus cut is a bit of a surprise - certainly it has not been a huge issue in the public debate. However, it is a good move that suggests healthy intellectual rigour from Kelly. If other MPs are losing their second home capital gain, the London MPs don't need to be compensated for not having access to it. (It should also be noted that as many Central London MPs have made themselves unpopular in the tea room by campaigning hard against their provincial colleagues' second homes this may be a bit of political expediency by Kelly showing that he is dishing out a bit of pain to all.)
So, thus far a pretty good showing by Kelly.As I mentioned above, there is still a lot more to come. What, for example, is the future of the dubious Communications Allowance? How much detail of claims will be published and how often? The full Kelly report, due out on 4th November, will still be very interesting.
Certainly this taster is encouraging for anyone who wants to see Parliament cleaned up. There is one note of caution, though. Kelly apparently wants these proposals phased in over five years. Whilst that might be a blanket intention to pacify frightened MPs, I don't think it is either acceptable to the public or practical politically. If faith in Parliament is to be restored, there must be one large, clear, short sharp shock. The last thing we need is for reforming Parliament to become a job like painting the Forth Bridge, which takes so long to do that by the time you've painted the whole thing, the bit you started on is dirty again.
