You cannot bribe someone spending their own money.

Think about that for a moment.

Can someone bribe a person to spend their money differently? No. It is not possible, not in the true sense of the word.

When someone spends another's money, that is another situation entirely. Inducements for personal gain to alter that decision enters an entirely new, more shady world.

When a Government spends (Taxpayers') money, it is open to inducements to alter the decisions it makes. Sometimes it will happen subtly, other times blatantly. Sometimes opaquely, other times transparently.

When those inducements are to reduce the amount spent, as in price competition, generous repayment terms or extra products, then that might be considered reasonable and prudent. It might be considered as an inducement to the collective Taxpayer.

When those inducements are targetted at individuals making those decisions in Government, then we move into dubious territory.

The Channel 4 Dispatches programme appears to show MPs displaying themselves for hire to "speak" to Ministers, to gain access to Committee members, to get themselves unduly involved in decision making.

If those MPs were selling themselves to allow one person or group to gain access to another person or group spending their own money, then nothing has really gone wrong. But this is not the case. It is about the spending of Taxpayers' money, of regulations that can give unfair advantages to individual or groups of companies.

Big Government, one that has pushed itself into so many facets of our lives, created so many laws and continues to produce a torrent of legislative effulent that distorts the market, is highly exposed to this threat of corruption. We have such a big Government. In spades.

If the Government does not decide who can build schools, then there is no scope for lobbying by those wishing to be considered (note that, Michael Gove, MP).

If the Government does not run Hospitals, there is far less scope for lobbying Government in respect of the Healthcare industry.

Generically, if the Government does not implement a monopoly, provide a subsidy or regulate significantly in sector X, then providers to sector X will have little or no advantage in gaining the State's ear, or should I say the good graces of individuals within that State apparatus.

A small State is a very good way to cut down on corruption. If the State is not an arbiter over the overwealming majority of our lives and socio-economic interactions, then we should be similarly
defended against attempts of, or fall-out from, corruption because of the plain fact of the matter being that the State does not intrude to begin with and, where it does, it does so with little to be gained financially or commercially.

We need to return to smaller Government. We need to return spending decisions to those who earn the money.

You cannot bribe someone spending their own money.