Hold up, calm down
At the risk of being controversial and not agreeing with the current mass hysteria that “they’re all at it” and we need a complete clear out of ALL MP’s, since when has government changed laws which reflect on us all on the back of a Daily Telegraph campaign ? THE F***ING DAILY TELEGRAPH FOR F***S SAKE.
Sure, there have been some MP’s who have broken the rules and these should be punished. Clearly any MP who can afford to give back £13K just like that hasn’t incurred these expenses in the first place.
However, and this is going to sound really controversial and I offer no apology, I feel a touch of sympathy for Douglas Hogg MP on this. Here is a man, rightfully elected by his constituents to represent them, who bizarrely has a moat outside his house. Now someone has to maintain this, and I’m guessing that while he’s at home, it’s either Mr Hogg or the local Clean-a-Moat franchise. Now when he’s elected as a public figure to represent his constituents and work on behalf of the whole country, I’d like to think that while he’s away, his home doesn’t go into disrepair.
Now clearly anyone with a house BIG enough to warrant a moat outside isn’t short of a few bob and maybe making tax payers pay up to have it cleaned is taking the p**s a bit in these lean times, but where do you draw the line ? Having his moat cleaned is important to him in the same way as any piece of house maintenance is important to any other MP’s.
We’re already seeing a switch in people able to afford to go to University. Twenty years ago when the students got bigger grants, anyone could go free in the knowledge that they wouldn’t leave with a debt similar to that of a third world country, or worse, the USA. And no-one gave a shit back then that most grant money went into the tills at the local night-club on 2-4-1 night. But now were seeing a change in University applications, less from poorer families, more from the well off middle class.
Clearly using the word ‘expenses’ should make it clear that MP’s shouldn’t benefit from ‘bending’ the rules, but putting limits on rent, bans on maintenance that seem frivolous to the majority (or the fucking Daily Telegraph editorial team who seem to be running the country at the moment) and therefore reducing the expenses that MP’s can claim for, the only situation you will arrive at is a return to the 18 century, the ONLY people who can actually afford to become MP’s are the land owning gentry or people fortunate enough to have a second flat overlooking the Thames.
Not too many sheet metal workers from Glasgow fall into either of those two categories, are there ?
Sure, there have been some MP’s who have broken the rules and these should be punished. Clearly any MP who can afford to give back £13K just like that hasn’t incurred these expenses in the first place.
However, and this is going to sound really controversial and I offer no apology, I feel a touch of sympathy for Douglas Hogg MP on this. Here is a man, rightfully elected by his constituents to represent them, who bizarrely has a moat outside his house. Now someone has to maintain this, and I’m guessing that while he’s at home, it’s either Mr Hogg or the local Clean-a-Moat franchise. Now when he’s elected as a public figure to represent his constituents and work on behalf of the whole country, I’d like to think that while he’s away, his home doesn’t go into disrepair.
Now clearly anyone with a house BIG enough to warrant a moat outside isn’t short of a few bob and maybe making tax payers pay up to have it cleaned is taking the p**s a bit in these lean times, but where do you draw the line ? Having his moat cleaned is important to him in the same way as any piece of house maintenance is important to any other MP’s.
We’re already seeing a switch in people able to afford to go to University. Twenty years ago when the students got bigger grants, anyone could go free in the knowledge that they wouldn’t leave with a debt similar to that of a third world country, or worse, the USA. And no-one gave a shit back then that most grant money went into the tills at the local night-club on 2-4-1 night. But now were seeing a change in University applications, less from poorer families, more from the well off middle class.
Clearly using the word ‘expenses’ should make it clear that MP’s shouldn’t benefit from ‘bending’ the rules, but putting limits on rent, bans on maintenance that seem frivolous to the majority (or the fucking Daily Telegraph editorial team who seem to be running the country at the moment) and therefore reducing the expenses that MP’s can claim for, the only situation you will arrive at is a return to the 18 century, the ONLY people who can actually afford to become MP’s are the land owning gentry or people fortunate enough to have a second flat overlooking the Thames.
Not too many sheet metal workers from Glasgow fall into either of those two categories, are there ?
posted by Lucky Col at
12:13 PM
1 Comments:
Interesting blog!
Best wishes,
Rosana
By
The lady in Red, at 3:11 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home