Straw, Rifkind, the ‘cash-for-access’ scandal and why modern politicians’ money addiction is so rotten

Jack Straw and Sir Malcolm Rifkind both deny any wrongdoing after they were enmeshed in a “cash-for-access” scandal.

And the two former foreign secretaries, who reportedly suggested a fee of at least £5,000 a day for services including political access for a fictitious Chinese company created by journalists in an undercover sting, may well end up being cleared.

But this row shines the spotlight once again on the murky role of money in politics and many MPs’ seemingly unrelenting addiction to cash.

In my opinion, nothing else erodes trust in politicians more than knowing they are earning money on the side or greasing their way into a corporate job when they retire.

Sure, they might occasionally lie. They might be wrong about issues. But, as our elected representatives, they should be focusing on only one job.

MPs could not be any more out of touch than when they suggest that their £67,060-a-year basic salaries, lavish expenses and handsome pensions are not enough – or when, like Sir Malcolm (pictured above) did today, they say they are “entitled” to more.

Something clearly needs to be done – and urgently.

Ed Miliband’s reaction to this new scandal – quickly ensuring Mr Straw “suspended himself” from the Parliamentary Labour Party and calling for MPs to be banned from having paid directorships and consultancies – is absolutely right.

It stands in stark contrast to David Cameron’s slowness in suspending the whip from Sir Malcolm.

Yet it all shows how far down a cash-lined slippery slope our politicians have already slid since former prime ministers Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair both began using their positions to shamelessly enrich themselves after leaving office.

These two figures (pictured above), more than any others, have set a very dangerous example to other politicians by ensuring their golden years have a silver lining.

To illustrate how much things have changed, consider the comparatively modest retirements of the Iron Lady’s predecessors.

Jim Callaghan, who had risen through trade union ranks to become PM during the Winter of Discontent that ushered Mrs Thatcher’s Tories into office, spent most of his later years helping Great Ormond Street Hospital and dutifully nursing his sick wife Audrey, who died only 11 days before he did at age 92 in 2005.

The previous Labour leader, former grammar schoolboy Harold Wilson, who spent eight years in No 10 and presided over a raft of social reforms such as legalising abortion and decriminalising homosexuality, retired to a three-bedroom bungalow on the Isles of Scilly before dying aged 79 in 1995.

Both men declined state funerals and had simple ceremonies instead.

Tories have traditionally preferred to live a little higher on the hog than their Labour counterparts once they have left office.

Yet carpenter’s son Ted Heath, who served at prime minister between 1970 and 1974 and then remained an MP for a further 26 years, preferred yachting and conducting orchestras to earning vast amounts of extra cash from after-dinner speeches like Mrs Thatcher did.

He also left his £5million house to charity when he died aged 89 in 2005.

Likewise, Winston Churchill, who spent much of his later life enjoying the company of high society on the French Riviera, never succumbed corporate greed and advising dodgy dictators like Blair has.

However, Britain’s rightly revered wartime leader did live off a trust fund that was created by wealthy supporters, before dying aged 90 in 1965.

Since the 1970s, of course, all living former prime ministers are paid gold-plated pensions, which currently pay out £97,125 a year.

Therefore, there should be absolutely no need for them to receive any extra money.

Those at the very top need to set examples and show that public life is an honour and not a means to gross enrichment.

If they do not, faith in our democracy will never be properly restored.