Maybe our MPs are more open after all 20 April 2007
Posted by Anders Hanson in Politics, Sweden.add a comment
Following on from my last post about how transparent MPs are about their earnings and those of their staff. I spotted an article about how Swedish MPs are being forced to reveal their outside interests:
All of Sweden’s members of parliament are to be forced to disclose their financial assets and any paid work that they perform outside of their parliamentary duties. Shares held in foreign companies must also be declared.
It is interesting that this is seen as a major thing, given that we take this sort of information for granted in this country. Sweden is often held up as a beacon of transparency, freedom of information and progress, and yet the Swedish public do not yet have a right to know the financial background of their politicians. Something which I would have thought was essential.
Although politicians in the UK and Sweden are generally honest and uncorrupt, this perhaps highlights a not unusual trait in Swedes - an old-fashioned and slightly naive trust in what authority figures tell you. In this country I feel we are all too ready to assume the worst of people in power, whereas Sweden tends to do the opposite.
MPs staff won’t be named 20 April 2007
Posted by Anders Hanson in Politics.2 comments
The Speaker has ruled that the names and salaries of MPs staff should not be made public and quite right too.
Firstly, I should probably clarify that this wouldn’t effect me anyway as my salary is paid for by supporters of Sheffield Hallam Liberal Democrats and not by taxpayers. But what I do believe is that everyone has a right to a certain amount of privacy.
MPs are there to represent the public and so their salaries are rightly in the public domain, as is information on any other income that they earn and shares, property etc that they earn an income from. This is largely so that the public know where an MP’s background when they make statements and to avoid any conflicts of interest.
But MPs’ staff are in a different situation. There are few good reasons why the public should need the information, but there is one compelling reason why they shouldn’t - privacy. How many people want their friends, neighbours and colleagues knowing how much they earn? MPs staff are basically there to do an administration and PA type job, which whilst it may be more interesting than most, is not a hugely influential position unless they are big political animals in their own right. There could be an argument for releasing the names as this would show how many people give jobs to their relatives. But even there, many of these relatives are actually very good at their job.
If the purpose is to reveal who has influence and power over MPs and so over our lives too, then perhaps we should instead be revealing the salaries of senior managers and PAs in all medium to large companies. They have far more power than a handful of poorly paid graduates, diary secretaries and PAs.
In fact, perhaps the one advantage of making MPs’ staff salaries public is that it would make people realise quite how badly most people who work in politics are paid. It certainly isn’t a job that you go in to for the money.
