Last week we reported that David Cameron was prepared to give the 'Conway treatment' to Tory MEPs who fell short on ethics.
Sky's Joey Jones is reporting that Mr Cameron is setting a reasonableness test for parliamentarians' conduct:
"We have got to recognise as MPs it is not enough just to meet the letter of the rules. We have to be happy that everything we put in place for funding our offices is something that reasonable and practical people would look at and say 'That's OK.'"
Guido blogs that Andy Coulson, head of Tory communications, wants a bloodbath amongst our MEPs.
If David Cameron does take this sort of decisive action he can emerge from this with his reputation as a strong leader considerably enhanced.
Noon PS: The MEP selection process was "managed" by CCHQ in order to avoid the grassroots deselecting Europhile MEPs and them then defecting to the LibDems etc for the remainder of the Parliament. Given the considerable overlap between Europhiles and episodes of sleaze David Cameron may be able to deliver a double whammy of cleansing.
Does the leader have the power to deselect MEPs or withdraw the whip in Brussels ?
Posted by: Man in a Shed | June 09, 2008 at 11:35
Man in a shed: Yes he does
Posted by: Anonymous Eurocrat | June 09, 2008 at 11:37
If David Cameron does take this sort of decisive action he can emerge from this with his reputation as a strong leader considerably enhanced.
Had the party members not been stitched up, most of them would have been on their way out anyway.
Lets hope we now hav a chance to pick MEPs that actually reflect our view (as well a don't spend all day, snouts in trough).
Posted by: Serf | June 09, 2008 at 11:49
Absolutely - if DC demonstrates he's not afraid to sack those that don't uphold standards, the contrast with Bottler Brown will be clear for all to see: "Decisive Dave".
Conversely, a failure to take action and instead let the problem rumble on could have grave consequences for his public image and his credibility on attacking Brown for weakness.
Posted by: Dr Ron McDonald | June 09, 2008 at 11:51
Well as someone who spent hours trudging the streets in the stormy rain of February, March and April to get Boris elected, and will do the same to turf out Martin Linton, I know that I for one will do absolutely bugger all to get any London Tory MEPs elected next year unless this is sorted out.
I might go and help out Nirj Deva and Dan Hannan.
Posted by: Wandsworth Voter | June 09, 2008 at 12:00
The levels of expenses being claimed are immoral whilst they do conform to the current EU rules.
DC should immediately set up a governance panel to produce strong enforceable guidelines and also sack the worst offending MEPs.
A very clear message and pressured Brown & Clegg to do the same or look very weak indeed.
Posted by: Mike Thomas (215cu) | June 09, 2008 at 12:00
This is a welcome move and hopefully it will get rid of the Europhile MPs, including those who refused to withdraw from the EPP.
What is the position of the 'acting' leader (Philip Bull****-Matthews) on MEP deselection and EPP membership, by the way?
Cameron could lance the boil that is rebellious, Europhile MEPs and ensure that the Conservatives can see off next year's UKIP threat!
Posted by: Jonathan M. Scott | June 09, 2008 at 12:01
wandsworth voter - Charles Tannock has been scrupulous in his answers to "Open Europe" and Syed Kamall certainly hasn't been implicated in anything. They are both good guys.
Posted by: Aurora Borealis | June 09, 2008 at 12:07
The wider issue here is the sheer mediocrity of our MEPs. They read like a list of failed cast offs from the John Major era.
I don't see why people like Deva, Sumberg, Atkins and Dover, all comprehensively rejected by their electorates, should be given the sly chance on a non existent mandate to top up their pensions.
Posted by: London Tory | June 09, 2008 at 12:10
Or, there again, it could be a gift to UKIP (i.e. The EU is corrupt beyond redemption) and/or the Greens (who, alone do not seem to be on the make).
Anyone who has been out canvassing recently, for whatever party, comes back with the same message from an ever increasing number of people. It goes like this: “I do not vote any more because politicians are only in it for themselves, for what they can make out of it.”
This is NOT the sign of a healthy democracy. The pay and allowances for MPs, MEPs and Councillors should be drastically cut. For those without a position in government, it is only a part time job anyway. Forcing the political class to earn some of their pennies in the real world would bring them back to planet Earth.
Posted by: David_McD | June 09, 2008 at 12:23
Phillip Bushill-Mathews is retiring at next MEP selection, going before he gets caught, I suspect. We have however got saddled with the Spelperson's other half on the ticket, who says the Spelpeople are not gravy training it? If not quite up to Alan Duncan standard!
Posted by: John Prendergast | June 09, 2008 at 12:24
Which of the Conservative MEPs are europhiles?
Posted by: Dave B | June 09, 2008 at 12:31
I agree with the article.
Posted by: HF | June 09, 2008 at 12:34
This should not be a witch-hunt for europhile MEPs. While I often don't agree with them, they should be allowed to get their voice heard. Let's face it, we would have had an open selection of MEPs had it not been for those members who do want to get rid of them; but because of a political view not how good they are.
Having said that, I agree that we should be tough with MEPs or MPs engaging in dodgy practice. Expenses should be tightened up and reduced in my opinion but we need to be convincing if we're going to argue it.
While there would be a little embarrassment about withdrawing the whip on 3 or 4 MEPs, it would strengthen us overall and ensure that malpractice is reduced.
Posted by: Michael Rutherford | June 09, 2008 at 12:42
Dave B:
Europhiles as follows: Ashworth, Atkins, Beazley, Bowis, Bushill-Matthews, Chichester, Elles, Evans, Harbour, Jackson, Karim, McMillan-Scott, Purvis, Stevenson.
Eurosceptics: Callanan, Deva, Hannan, Heaton-Harris, Helmer, Kamall, Sumberg, van Orden
Fence-sitters: Bradbourn, Dover, Kirkhope, Parish, Sturdy, Tannock
Posted by: Anonymous Eurocrat | June 09, 2008 at 12:46
Let's face it, we would have had an open selection of MEPs had it not been for those members who do want to get rid of them; but because of a political view not how good they are.
Are you seriously suggesting that the political views of a potential candidate should play no part in whether they are selected or not?
Posted by: Alex Swanson | June 09, 2008 at 12:47
This should not be a witch-hunt for europhile MEPs. While I often don't agree with them, they should be allowed to get their voice heard. Let's face it, we would have had an open selection of MEPs had it not been for those members who do want to get rid of them; but because of a political view not how good they are.
Having said that, I agree that we should be tough with MEPs or MPs engaging in dodgy practice. Expenses should be tightened up and reduced in my opinion but we need to be convincing if we're going to argue it.
While there would be a little embarrassment about withdrawing the whip on 3 or 4 MEPs, it would strengthen us overall and ensure that malpractice is reduced.
Posted by: Michael Rutherford | June 09, 2008 at 12:48
Anyone got any idea as to timescale? The longer the speculation is allowed to go on the more feverish the debate will become and it will detract from sensible discussion about policy, not to mention cause damage as far as Henley is concerned!
Posted by: Aurora Borealis | June 09, 2008 at 12:56
they should be allowed to get their voice heard
Why? They're there to represent their constituents, and they were elected on the basis of their membership of the Conservative Party. They have no right to get themselves elected and then ignore everybody else.
It is - or should be - up to the membership who they want to stand on the Conservative ticket. And if that membership is eurosceptic, then europhiles need not apply. They can go off to another party more suited to their tastes.
Posted by: Alex Swanson | June 09, 2008 at 13:36
Some of the eurosceptic MEPs might get caught up in this, but who cares? Dover is such. There will be more europhile casualties so a war of attrition will be advantageous politically.
Posted by: Tapestry | June 09, 2008 at 14:07
Looks like I'm wrong about Dover! from above list.
Posted by: Tapestry | June 09, 2008 at 14:07
Forgive me, I'm sure that Charles Tannock and Syed Kamall are not implicated in this, and I would happily see them elected as much as Deva or Hannan. That said I still won't be happy to put in the sort of hours I did this year if it runs the risk of my vote being used to elect a Europhile candidate. That's the problem with PR I suppose. I would be happier to put those hours in if I could believe that Tory MEPs elected would follow Tory manifestos - you know who I'm talking about.
Posted by: Wandsworth Voter | June 09, 2008 at 14:11
I wouldn't shed ears about Dover being in the list Tapestry.
Posted by: Andrew Woodman | June 09, 2008 at 14:22
ears?!!!
Posted by: Aurora Borealis | June 09, 2008 at 14:23
I can assure you that Syed Kamall is an excellent MEP - and, what's more, rather than going native like some, he has actually become MORE EUROSCEPTIC since he joined the Brussels contigent. He is also very active in the local constituencies around London.
Posted by: Richard Patient | June 09, 2008 at 14:29
Agree totally, Richard Patient! He and Charles Tannock have both been very active. Charles always comes to help us in Hammersmith and/or Fulham at Election times and Syed too has good links with us (in fact he was in the final of the selection which eventually saw Greg Hands elected as Hammersmith & Fulham MP in 2005). Syed spoke very interestingly at one of our Ward Suppers not that long ago.
Posted by: Sally Roberts | June 09, 2008 at 14:42
I think we can all agree that MEPs who cheat the system should be sacked, not just europhiles.
However, i think the best thing to do is wipe the slate clean and have an open selection procedure for all our MEPs.
Posted by: Dale | June 09, 2008 at 14:55
Based upon the expenses shredding story in this morning's Times, will ALL Conservative MP's now voluntarily publish their expenses for the past 6 years to prove to the public that there is no sleaze, nothing to hide.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4087705.ece
Posted by: Ian Parker-Joseph | June 09, 2008 at 15:04
What credibility have the Cons got to attack anyone on embezzlement if we tolerate it within our own ranks!
Sort it out!
Posted by: Transparency Now! | June 09, 2008 at 16:05
We are doing! Give them a chance - it can't be done in one day (or can it?)
Posted by: Aurora Borealis | June 09, 2008 at 16:10
David Mc_D at 12:23 said all MPs, MEPs and councillors should be paid less - "Forcing the political class to earn some of their pennies in the real world would bring them back to planet Earth."
I have always said that councillors should not be paid more as they then start to enter the realm of professional council representative, agents of the council, in other words, and not servants of the public. Most MPs and MEPs have such a heavy workload that they should not be able to hold down a second (or more) job so need the cash to be able to get on with the job of representing and working on behalf of the public.
To my mind the key factor is that the MPs and MEPs ought to be worth their salt. We should see the benefits of their work on our behalf. Where it all goes so terribly wrong, and the reason why people on the doorstep tell us there is nothing to choose between one lot of slimy gits and another, is that the Labour government are screwing people out of every penny for which we all get the blame.
As far as MEPs are concerned, the public never see them; when they do, and there are some notable exceptions in Roge Helmer, Dan Hannan and Nirj Deva and a couple of others, they are working towards the fulfilment of the European Union's machinations - they are total Euro-sellouts, in other words, working against the interests of the people of this country.
To be told that the selection process was 'managed' because these traitors might have got the hump and ratted to the Liberals is, frankly, outrageous. Does the list system not allow for vacancies mid-term replaced as candidates slide up into place without by-elections?
Posted by: Don Hoyle | June 09, 2008 at 16:42
"Whoopsy daisy, I made a mistake" never mind i'm guaranteed to get re-elected.
Now thats what I call democracy.NOT.
Posted by: Dick Wishart | June 09, 2008 at 20:22
Let us just leave the EU please and renegotiate as Global Vision have suggested - so the problem does not arise. End of matter.
Posted by: Martin | June 09, 2008 at 20:29
Andy Coulson is right...we do need a bloodbath amongst our MEPs.
Every Brussels MEP who has not followed procedures and shown full transparency should be sacked.
The arrogance shown by some of our MEPs is breathtaking.
David Cameron is doing a great job by taking the lead on this, and I hope he succeeds.
Posted by: Cllr Brook Whelan | June 09, 2008 at 21:49
I note that today there was some uncertainty on my position on Europe. Ask anyone in the North West or who is in the know. I am an ardent Eurosceptic and that is why I want to fight for Britain in the European Parliament.
Posted by: Den Dover MEP for North West England | June 09, 2008 at 22:54
Tannock is a nice bloke and was sensibly Eurosceptic.
WAS
Last time I heard him speak he used the phrase 'Europe is coming our way' far too often (once is too often).
He either needs deselecting or kidnapping and thoroughly deprogramming, as you would an ex Moony.
Coming our way my arse...
Posted by: Treacle | June 10, 2008 at 02:18
May I make a suggestion? I can imagine that there are very good reasons why MEP's use these "paying agents" - tax & NI, ensuring that the tax residence of the employees is not in doubt etc. etc.
So why not have a single paying agent for all Conservative MEP's? All MEP staffing arrangements could be set up with that company and expenses would be claimed solely by that company. Each MEP would be a shareholder (if the is permitted under EU rules, otherwise held in trust for the benefit of Battersea Dogs Home), but the directors would be independent (probably CCHQ appointees).
Posted by: Mark WIlliams | June 10, 2008 at 09:02
Mark Williams - that is the most sensible suggestion I have seen for some time!
Posted by: Aurora Borealis | June 10, 2008 at 09:17
The Telegraph has a story today about Labour MEP Cashman (very apt name) paying his live-in lover boy £8,000 a month from expenses which evens things up a bit on the sleaze front. However Mandrake on p.8 has more about Tory MEP Atkins - this time about his wife being paid up to £40,000 a year.
Will they never learn?
Posted by: Edward Huxley | June 10, 2008 at 09:34
Funny how when they want to foist ID cards on us, politicians say "If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear", yet when we want to se their expenses claims it's "a private matter" or "trivial" or "an invasion of privacy"
I'm surprised CCHQ hasn't done more muck-raking on Labour to try and drag them into it. I certainly think we have too many arrogant and greedy MPs and MEPs, most of them of the older generation who seem to think they have a divine right to trouser huge sums of money and not answer to anyone.
I look forward to Cameron sacking Giles Chichester and Robert Atkins- greedy thieves.
And since Den Dover is a ConHome reader, would he provide a weblink to his list of expenses for us all to see and to ease our collective minds? Mr Dover, the ball's in your court....
Posted by: Cleethorpes Rock | June 10, 2008 at 09:41
Why is it that the expenses fiddles are all being perpetrated by Tories and UKIP - the two parties the British people entrusted to stamp out the financial excesses of the European Parliament?
It's appalling that they've gone native, while Labour and the Liberal Democrats have in place systems which monitor their MEPs claims.
Why should anyone vote Tory or UKIP next year? We are told constantly that Europe is corrupt and it seems the MEPs with the largest snouts in the trough are those who campaign against the waste and profligacy of the EU.
What an absolute disgrace. Deselect all our MEPs with the exception of Hannan and start with a clean slate. Cameron has the power to do it and it would please party activists.
Posted by: Felixstowe Fiddler | June 10, 2008 at 10:05
FF - Why should Hannan be allowed to remain if all the others are booted out?
Posted by: Aurora Borealis | June 10, 2008 at 10:12
Felixstowe Fiddler (another person afraid to give his or her name) is unaware that in the Daily Telegraph editorial yesterday about questions put by Open Europe to all MEPs:
Thirteen out of 28 Conservative MEPs refused to answer, so did 15 out of 19 Labour MEPs and 8 out of 11 LibDems. Nine out of 10 UKIP members responded as did both Greens.
As the editorial ends - What do these other parties have to hide? Could it be that they are up to no good themselves?
Posted by: Edward Huxley | June 10, 2008 at 11:11