Jack Straw & Malcolm Rifkind in 'cash for access' sting.

Getting to the bottom of scandals, sourcing newsworthy stories, exposing scandals and secrets are one thing, but entrapment is lazy journalism, cynical and wrong.

I agree, and after being a life long Telegraph reader, I have as from today cancelled my subscription. I'm going to find out who to complain to and let them know in no uncertain terms how I feel. I doubt they'll care, but it'll make me feel better. What with their reporting of HSBC, and now this, they have certainly gone too far. I'm sure both these MP's have been foolish, but I doubt very much that they have been wilfully underhand or broken the law unless it can be proved otherwise.

We cannot know whether they have broken the law in any way at this stage, and they are indeed innocent until proven guilty. I just think that greed lies behind this need to earn more money on top of their MP's. If they are doing their job properly (for which we are paying them) they would not have time for all this money-chasing.

But Jack Straw wasn't going to do it until after he had left, so it wasn't on top of his MP's pay, although he did say he earned £5000 for giving a speech at the moment.

I see no more greed than that of a Dr or Dentist taking on private work, a teacher taking on private tuition or people taking on council work or any other outside occupation along with their own job. Jack Straw was in fact putting out feelers for occupation after he left parliament! What on earth is wrong with that?! Sir Malcolm was overheard discussing an advisory role with this fictitious company, which he might or might not take up. No commitment was given by either of them as to what their decision might be. Neither of them have broken the law as very many MP's have outside interests of a financial nature, and so long as they're declared that's perfectly ok. But for these two, they are to be hanged drawn and quartered without further ado. Other MP's are piously jumping on this bandwagon and are 'appalled' and 'horrified!! Why? In the next breath we understand it's common practice!!
What a nest of hypocritical vipers!! Something is telling me that here's one person who won't be voting in May. Who on earth is there to vote for?!!

Vote for what you believe in, niggly.

Being a good MP is a full-time job. That is why we pay them a decent salary plus allowances.

A lot of people in top positions only sleep for 3 or 4 hours a night. Which leaves time and energy for other activities.

Is that why you see them falling asleep on the parliamentary benches, soontobe?

durhamjen

As niggleynellie says, many professionals take on work outside their full time employment. I occasionally did staff training, privately when working for the la. The rule was any such work would be declared and done outside working hours, i.e. by taking annual leave. It worked well.

I'm probably a lone voice in feeling we should pay MP's more, they earn half what a GP does or much less than many professionals with similarly huge responsibilities and long hours. I'd increase the salary, provide accommodation in London rather than a 2nd home allowance. Any work outside their paid job to be declared on public sites and discouraged!

www.spinwatch.org/index.php/issues/lobbying/item/5744-just-because-everyone-s-at-it-doesn-t-make-it-right

I agree Iam. I would do the same . MP's by the way of things are not well paid when compared to other professional jobs. I would pay a realistic salary, provide accommodation in London in the way of service flats or whatever. Make outside financial interests illegal,(difficult with a family business of course!!) expenses would be declared and authorised or not!! and probably other things too! That way we might,just might get some sense and proper commitment from our MP's, and put a stop to the newspapers digging for dirt. Folorn hope probably!!!

I've always had the impression that Jack Straw and Malcolm Rifkind were committed MPs. Both of them have been MPs for a very long time so it would appear that their constituents thought they were committed too.

Is that why you see them falling asleep on the parliamentary benches, soontobe?

I don't see them falling asleep, djen - I can't see them in the House at all most of the time

That's because they're all doing other jobs!
Shows how cynical we are all getting.

No it's cos it's all so BORING!!!!!!! (and they're getting on a bit!!!)

I assumed roseq meant because they weren't there!

Or of course you could switch on your tele to freeview 131 where they are all still working voting on the Serious Crime Bill as I type. 21.48pm

Blasted slackers working still at this time of night.

Have watched it a lot today. There were not many of them there even when Cameron came in.
It seems they all have screens in their rooms in the commons and can just go for the vote. There was a program on last week showing the PM having to go back for a vote from a white tie function because the Labour party tried to bring in a vote early.

You could be answering yourself then DJ.

The benches are full tonight.

Just switched over. Not many there at all.
Scottish affairs committee now.
Debate on oesophageal cancer. Most of them left.

DJ

Just because when you switched over the voting for the ammendments were over doesn't mean they were not there ,I do not exaggerate to prove a point!!!

Yes Parliament is still going 22.34 pm as Conservative Mike Wheatherley is talking of Oesopageal Cancer, having had oesophogeal cancer himself. The point is Parliament is not a 9-5 job which I think some people believe it is, or even less hours worked reading some posts.

Did I just miss something or did Newsnight discuss Rifkind but totally ignore to mention/discuss Jack Straw?

You're right, it's not a 9-5 job. They did not start until 2.00 p.m.