Balls Amendment

I recently on a different board got wound up about not hearing anything about the proposed private members bill that will exempt MPs from the freedom of information act. This turned out because it had been in the news on Friday and I'd not been paying attention all weekend. The MP's (Both labour and tory) claim it is to protect their constituents privacy, but surely this can be protected in a bill that doesn't also conveniently allow MPs to once again drift into unaccountability? Notably both leaders have left this one to concience, and most MPs in teh two major parties clearly have none. David Cameron decided attending teh FA cup final was more important than attending teh vote and while he opposes it in the press he has done sweet FA to oppose it in teh house, where it counts, and where he was elected to wield some form of power. A close ally of Gordon brown, a Mr Ed Balls (heheheh Balls) has stated that MP's expenses will still eb public and an amendment is apparently being drafted. Thing is, I'm not just concerned about expenses (although make no mistake, they do concern me) I'm concerned about for what company's the mP worked for in the past, what companies they hold shares in, what boards the MP or their families/close friends sit on. All these are required these days in order to make sure that the petty corruption, backhanders and Jobs for the boys that have been indicative of both the previous and the current government are aired to the public so the minister in question can be suitably harrased about it in apublic forum.

Anyone who is in a publicly elected post would do well to remember, we're your boss, we're who you work for we are in charge.