MPs out-of-pocket

What the Nat insider is defending is a sort of Maundy Money that I was posting on last week in so far as ancient political rights are concerned.MPs' expense allowances are a political right in consequence of duty, a bit like taxation. The small amount of money distributed for others as alms - is routinely used just for themselves in our system going by the list of acceptable claims. If it's not to help pay the cost of the host (which is what a koha would be) in whose pocket do these out-of-pocket expenses end up? It's all officially none of our business. Well if it is none of our business let's do it properly.The allowances and the salaries and the expenses of politicians - as the British parliament has shown over the last few weeks - is riddled with transparency and honesty issues. There is also a side-show element to anything involving the small amounts spent by politicians on anything the media decide is unworthy.

The best way to solve these issues would be to have individual MP's on a salary set in the constitution as a percentage of the average wage (@ $131,000 pa for a backbencher it must be around 300% at present!) and then an equivalent amount to be bulk-funded at the start of the term - to be paid to the MP's party administration to use as they please. Every electorate MP gets a set amount bulk-funded to them to run their local office as they please. As they please. Parliamentary services should not be involved with these staff - the conflicts and chinese walls and so on in the current system is open to abuse - better they wash their hands of it altogether. If the party wants to spend all that money on slick ads and campaigning - so be it, if they want to spend it all on staffing - so be it. So long as the parliamentary service involvement and staff is cut back in proportion to the money the MPs and parties receive then it will all be worth it.

I think it would be simpler to do it that way despite some of the drawbacks. As long as the allocation of money is on a fair basis (eg. electorate size is now considered a relevant factor in resourcing) then all the little perks and stuff can be cut - including the bullshit multiple versions of what is and is not political campaign literature/electorate notices. Let the MPs hire and fire staff directly and let them pay for all their own material.

I previously posted on the allowances - esp. in respect of the PM's personal grooming clause - which he must not have claimed yet going by his appearance.