'Lasting effect' of Conway saga

David Porter
Westminster correspondent, BBC Scotland

It's a gag doing the rounds here at Westminster - Derek Conway has announced he's going to stand down as a MP in order to spend more time with his staff.

Derek Conway will stand down at the next General Election

Mr Conway is, of course, the Conservative who put his son on the payroll - only for a House of Commons committee to say the son, Freddie, had been "all but invisible" at Westminster.

Mr Conway now knows his fate. Amid wholesale condemnation, the House of Commons has rubber-stamp a recommendation that he be suspended for 10 days and repay more than £13,000.

Earlier, Conservative leader David Cameron withdrew the party whip from Mr Conway - effectively cutting him adrift and casting him into the political wilderness.

Recognising the inevitability of the situation, Mr Conway announced he would leave parliament at the next general election.

But with a general election perhaps two years away, he will still collect his MP salary all associated allowances.

Of course Mr Conway is not in a minority of one. MPs taking on members of their family to work on their staff is not at all unusual.

What is expected is that anyone employed by an MP and paid for out of the staffing allowance must be carrying out parliamentary work

Employing your wife - and sometimes your husband - must seem like killing two birds with one stone: you take on someone you trust, and you get to see more of them.

Such arrangements are credited with saving the marriages of a number of MPs.

It is impossible to know precisely how many MPs employ family members - but a non-exhaustive study suggests probably at least 100 out of the total 646 have a relative, spouse, child, or even a parent on their staff.

Some MPs can be rather coy about admitting to employing family - but some arrangements are long-standing.

Leo Beckett, the husband of the former foreign secretary Margaret Beckett, has worked on his wife's staff for many years, currently in the role of office manager.

A number of Scottish MPs also employ their partners to help run their offices.

'More openness'

The basic guidance for MPs taking on staff is contained in a handy little booklet called the Green Book.

But these are only guidelines, and MPs are left to make their own decisions about whom they employ and what they are paid, within their parliamentary allowance.

What is expected is that anyone employed by an MP and paid for out of the staffing allowance must be carrying out parliamentary work.

Probably one of the lasting effects of this whole saga is that calls for more transparency and openness about how MPs conduct their financial affairs will become ever louder.

Downing Street says the prime minister wants greater transparency over MPs' expenditure in the future, but adds that exactly how new rules or practices would be arrived at would be up to the House of Commons authorities to consider.

Margaret Beckett's husband has worked on her staff for years

The leaders of the opposition have also been quick to call for more openness.

Predictably, there are now calls for a tightening of the rules to require MPs to submit receipts for all expenses claims above a threshold of £50. The current ceiling is £250 per item or claim.

And here there's a growing feeling that MPs should look to Edinburgh.

In the Scottish Parliament, there is far more transparency and expenses have to be more rigorously documented. MSPs are required to publish details of their expenditure - in some cases right down to the cost of a bus ticket.

Freedom of Information legislation has meant that, since 2006, MSPs have had to give details of all claims, however small.

It's looking increasingly likely that in future MPs will have to go down the same road.

Some at Westminster will be dismayed by this, but change is most definitely coming. That might be the lasting legacy of the Conway and Sons saga.