Wednesday 15 June 2005

The need to be squeaky clean.

This story just won't go away. I have no information other than what's been published in the press but it would have been extraordinarily foolish for David McLetchie to claim for non-parliamentary taxi fares, especially as he was the one who brought down former First Minister Henry McLeish over his expenses.

I'm afraid that this approach won't do:

The Scottish Conservatives' leader, David McLetchie, is refusing to release full details of his Holyrood expenses.

Copies of his claims have been published in response to freedom of information requests, but with some items blacked out.

In this day and age privacy doesn't exist. Anyone in politics - or business - must work on the assumption that everything one does will be revealed to the public sooner or later. And that's just how it should be when taxpayers' money is involved.

1 comment:

David Farrer said...

Comments made on previous template:

Stuart Dickson
The normally Conservative-supporting Scotsman newspaper piles on the pain today:

McLetchie expenses hidden - but Labour MSP's printed
16 June 2005, 13:13:19 GMT+01:00 – Like – Reply

McLetchie is a typical Tory, he just can't help himself. Give him half a chance and he can't get his snout in the trough fast enough. The people have had enough of Thatcherism! It's time we had an economic system based upon need, not greed.

Up the Workers!!!
15 June 2005, 20:56:54 GMT+01:00 – Like – Reply

The Bagged Bear
I agree whole heartedly with your suggestion that the base assumption must be that everything is transparent.

I recall my first meeting as a new recruit, when the Chairman of the Board addressed us on: (a) the correct choice of newspaper (The Times or Financial Times); and (b) the need always to write letters to clients on the assumption that (despite there being some notional confidentiality in place) there was always every possibility that your letter could end up being splashed all over the front page of the News of the World.

Happily given directive (a), had (b) occurred then in theory no one in the company would ever have known. I wouldn't have liked to test it though.
15 June 2005, 14:26:54 GMT+01:00