Commons job for Conservative MP's son highlights expenses row

Conservative MP Derek Conway has been employing his 21-year-old student son as a researcher. There is nothing wrong with this. But, as the Guardian points out this morning, it does add extra backing to those arguing that the Freedom of Information act parliamentary exemption amendment is aimed at quietly covering up details of MP's expenses:

Public embarrassment over MPs' use of official parliamentary allowances deepened yesterday after it was revealed that a senior Conservative MP had employed his 21-year-old student son as a part-time researcher at the Commons.

According to the Sunday Times, Derek Conway, a former government whip and an MP for 23 years, paid his son, Freddie, a third year geography student at Newcastle university, £981 a month for unspecified work. The facts were not denied last night, although his allies say the young man only works in his father's office part-time.

Mr Conway has not broken either the law or parliamentary rules which allow MPs to employ family members on their staff. But MPs, who have allowances of up to £80,000 a year for staff in London and their constituency, disagree as to how appropriate such employment is.

"Others do it," said one MP.

But the disclosure comes as the Tory private member's bill to exempt MPs from requests under the Freedom of Information Act makes its way through parliament. MPs on both sides of the argument are pointing to media attacks as proof either that their colleagues have something to hide - or that they are being unfairly persecuted by those settling scores.

Update: After posting this I saw that the Norfolk Blogger offered some trenchant views on it yesterday.

I have lobbied a Lord

I have now lobbied a Lord, namely Lord Stoddart of Swindon, to implore him to vote against a parliametary exemption from the Freedom of Information Act.

It is all a bit surreal really. I have written copious letters to my MP in the past. But writing to a Lord is a bit weird.

Through the "Write to them - Lords" website you can choose a random Lord or one with an interest in a particular subject, a connection with a particular place or your birthday (!).

I chose one with a connection to the county where I live, Berkshire. Lord Stoddart came up (pictured). He used to be Labour but is now "Independent Labour". It'll be interesting to see which way he votes.

Should the public know how much the Foreign Office spends on Ferrero Rocher chocolates?

The BBC reports:

Plans are due to be unveiled to deter "pointless and mischievous" requests under the Freedom of Information Act. UK Information Commissioner Richard Thomas will say the act's reputation is being jeopardised by such inquiries.

The commissioner cites some interesting examples which he regards as unreasonable and needing to be filtered out by existing provisions in the Freedom of Information Act:

-Someone asking for the amount spent by the Foreign Office on Ferrero Rocher chocolates. This is somewhat bizarre. I remember an advert for said chocolates which was based in an Embassy. Perhaps this advert inspired the request. That aside, I would certainly be concerned if the Foreign Office was spending any money on the 'luxury' of Ferrero Rocher chocolates and I think the amount should be in the public domain.

-Someone asking for the amount spent by the Prime Minister on make-up. I think this is an absolutely valid request. I think most people would be surprised that their taxes are going to provide make-up for the Prime Minister at all.

-Someone asking for the number of eligible bachelors in the Hampshire Police Force. Well, that is a bit nuts. I would have thought it raised a few concerns on confidentiality, and I would be surprised if it was entertained in the first place, unless someone can explain to me why providing this information would be enlightening and in the public interest.

There is a very fine line here. I am concerned that the commissioner is going to make it harder for the public to find out information. It is all very subjective. In the future, for example, will information about guests at Chequers not be forthcoming? I seem to recall that it took Norman Baker (or a Norman Baker lookalike) ages to get this information and it was like getting blood out of a stone. Norman Baker had to take the House of Commons to court to get MP's detailed expenses released.

So this is not an area to be dealt with lightly, especially given the parallel move by dinosaurs to get parliament exempted from the Freedom of Information act.

'A Black day for Parliament' - FOIA exemption bill

..well said, David Heath MP. My wife was using the computer for a little while and our digibox telly was on the blink so I resorted to Ceefax for the first time in several years. It was a bit like going back to writing on a slate with a stone.

But Ceefax informed me of the outrageous bill going through Parliament to exempt MPs and Lords from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The FOIA was astoundingly watered down in the first place. To think that some jumped up Tory wants to exempt MPs and Lords from it, is just breathtakingly disgraceful!

Of course, Tories will always find non-sensical arguments like confidentiality of letters from constituents. But you have to ask: Does this stop Sweden from having one of the world's best freedom of information regimes? Or the USA?