Here's a radical thought for a Cameron government. Abolish this outrageous MPs' Communications Allowance. £6.5 million saved. Job Done.
Hattip: ConservativeHome
Friday, May 01, 2009
How to Make Our MPs Cost Less: Part 94
If you want to make your blood boil, click HERE. For those of you who can't be arsed, it's a full page advert in the Scunthorpe Telegraph, advertising how wonderful the two local Labour MPs are. And you know what the wonderful thing about it is? It's paid for you, the Great British fool Taxpayer.
Here's a radical thought for a Cameron government. Abolish this outrageous MPs' Communications Allowance. £6.5 million saved. Job Done.
Hattip: ConservativeHome
Here's a radical thought for a Cameron government. Abolish this outrageous MPs' Communications Allowance. £6.5 million saved. Job Done.
Hattip: ConservativeHome
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
I have an interest here. In my day job adverts adverts from MPs are very lucrative. So on the one hand, yes, I see your point, but on the other hand they pay towards our mortgage.
Why do MPs continue to reckon we are so naive as to believe that them being photographed grinning inanely next to some awkward looking local worthies and or charity cases constitutes useful action on the behalf of constituents?
Wouldn't it be nice if every single serving MP from this Parliament, of whatever party, were ousted at the next election and replaced by a complete novice? They could hardly do any worse than this shower.
Blimey - what a coincidence.
Have just posted about Mr Hannan's recent comment on getting the representatives we deserve!
If these adverts serve to increase communication between MPs and their constituents, they're well worth the (probably minimal) cost. What do you expect MPs to write - "we're rubbish, if you need our help call in at our surgery"?
This is as feeble as your attempt to indict those (Labour) MPs running tea mornings for the appalling crime of trying to stay in touch with their constituents. There may be a point at which incumbency advantage becomes an issue, but there is no evidence that we are there now.
Good quality rope is £3.30 a metre on Ebay. I reckon we need 5 metres per MP (6 for Prescott and Pickles) so that's 646 x 5 = 3230 metres plus 2 extra metres for the fatties = 3232m.
£10,665
sorted
You can take the Grim out of Grimsby so hopefully we will soon get these thieving ***** out of Scunthorpe.
This is shocking but is rife. I'm a Labour Party man so I'm not being partisan (also been involved with MPs' offices and know that this is widespread). Submissions to Sir Christopher Kelly's review are needed on this issue.
The focus so far has been second hmes and the John Lewis list but far worse abuse is happening as Iain rightly points out under the 'Communications Allowance' and generally within the IEP budget.
I don't think that they're actually allowed to do this under the Communications Allowance rules. Here's the relevant section:
Content of Newsletters etc.
23. The content of publications should not seek, directly or indirectly, to compare a Member’s party favourably with another, promote one party at the expense ofanother or seek to undermine the reputations ofpolitical opponents. In this context, the selective useof statistics should also be avoided. This means thatthe following examples would not be acceptable:
“Investment in our national health service will havetrebled over the past 10 years to 2007/08.”
“Council tax has already increased by a staggeringamount since 1997.”
24. You may wish to refer to increased Government funding or Government intervention and how it has affected your constituency. This can be included where you can demonstrate how your involvement has brought this about. This is especially relevant where local, constituency-based schemes have benefited from the support of the Member:
“As a result of my Private Member’s Bill, the government have decided to award 40,000 free bus passes for pensioners.”
“I helped the ******** Theatre retain its £85,000 grant from the Association of London Government and was delighted that they received a £400,000 increase in its grant from the government-funded Arts Council for the next three years.”
If this party political advert has been cleared it is a disgrace.
Perhaps you should use your role to encourage Torys not to use the allowance - it seems that even the MP which sponsors your Pass (so presumably who you wor for) spends an awfully large amount of money on this...
...a similar comment didn't make it through moderation a while ago... not sure why.
I have made my position perfectly clear on this. I don't care which party MPs belong to, I don't approve of this "allowance". MPs who use it can answer for themselves. If I were standing at the next election I would make a pledge not to use it. Could I be more up front than that?
I just looked at the advert. It's quite clear that the MP on the left is a lesbian.
So can I quote you criticising my Tory MP who spent £4,444 of the communications allowance in 2007/08?
http://tinyurl.com/c3xbl8
You don't expect MPs actually to meet their constituents do you? Walk the street, have public meetings, that sort of thing?
How quaint.
Iain, Perhaps Thatsnews and PPE, would not object to the following words being placed in heavy type at the foot of the advertisement!
THIS ADVERTISEMENT HAS BEEN PAID BY THE UK TAXPAYERS UNDER THE COMMUNICATION ALLOWANCE RULES.
Perhaps, in the meantime The Taxpayers Alliance could consider writing to all local newspapers with a view of having this 'allowance' stopped, saving the country money.
Well done for highlighting it.
Thatsnews. If you are reliant on such advertisements then that suggests that your newspaper is not interesting. An interesting newspaper is required reading, is it not?
Actually, MPs have to use the Communications Allowance for some things. If they have websites paid for out of Parliamentary funds for example they have to use the Comms Allowance to pay for it.
Mike Hobday, presumably you would only criticise the Tory MP if you yourself were committed not to use it.
Anonymous 9.02. I'd pay for that myself.
@ppe 10.23
They can write whatever they like but pay for it themselves.
Just as with their efforts to get the taxpayer to fund political parties - non starter as far as I'm concerned.
If anyone wants to be an MP they should pay for the advertising, publicity etc themselves.
If an MP does a decent job for their constituents they'll be in the local paper all the time and won't need to spend our hard earned cash on full page newspaper adverts to remind their constituents that they exist.
Getting rid of the communications allowance would be a great idea. That's assuming your aim is to further distance MPs from their constituents. Sure, some will abuse it, but that's why there should be better and stronger oversight.
Um...scrapping the Communications Allowance is already Conservative Party Policy, and has been for some time.
Post a Comment