Damage Limitation or Not

I’ve watched two very different approaches to the defence of MPs expenses claims in the last few days.

It would seem that none of the political parties have got this right (probably something to do with the fact that MPs from all sides have their noses firmly planted in the expenses trough) but some have being doing it better than others.

Eric Pickles’ laughable defence of his claim for a second home while living less than 40 miles from Westminster on Question Time last week was one of the worst I’ve ever seen. Apparently the audience didn’t understand that Westminster works like clockwork so he has to be there on time; public transport is unreliable and as a result he had to work really long days! The audience, with good reason, simply laughed at him.

The second example is Richard Timney's apology for claiming a few porn films on expenses paid for by the tax payer. Putting aside his wife’s spot of bother over claiming for a second home that looks very much like her main residence, he handled the situation as best he could.

He stepped outside the gate of his house, read a short statement, accepted the anger his actions will have created, said sorry repeatedly and then stepped back through the gate. Short, to the point and direct. I do not think that it will save his wife’s job but if you had to advise him this is what you’d suggest.

I am confident that we will be seeing many more leaks around MPs expenses and will watch with interest at the different approached to damage limitation.