Quote:
Originally Posted by HRH_H_Crab
Can't find very much about expenses prior to Tony Blairs election.
Everything seems to be about the current scandal (not too surprising really).
Any chance you can help me out as you seem to have done some research?
In any case, even if the claims which lead to the current scandal were inflated as a result of a pay freeze, I don't believe that this provides any evidence whatsoever that the pay freeze was a bad idea in and of itself.
Except perhaps that there should have been a tightening of the claims procedure alongside the pay freeze - something that I suspect would have had a great deal of cross party resistance.
My main objection to the MPs expense scandal is not the incompetence shown by Labour in their administration of parliamentary rules and regulations regarding pay and expenses, but the greed and avarice shown by MPs of ALL parties.
And I f**king object to the Telegraph trying to con me into thinking that the greed and avarice was some unfortunate result of that incompetence, and more importantly successfully conning less intelligent voters...
|
Firstly no rational human being, other than yourself, has considered the coverage bias - duck island, moat cleaning ... hardly an anti-labour bias -
Secondly it wasn't a 'pay freeze'. You make it sound like the labour government bravely sought to reduce MP pay. Such an idea is best described as bollocks.
New Labour deliberately instituted a system whereby expenses were used to top up wages. They did this because they hoped to avoid adverse publicity from a pay rise.
I happen to feel that having done this - basically "
tried to hide something in order to avoid being criticised for it but allowing it to go on anyway" that there is some justice in it now exploding in the governments face.
I have this hunch that you may fly off the handle but let's see.