Friday, 27 March 2009

Why do M.Ps. think they are entitled to claim expenses.

IMG_0723 - London - Palace of WestminsterImage by Asten via Flickr

On question time last night I listened to the ramblings of a disillusioned M.P. as he tried to justify the need for claiming expenses on his second home in London.
The poor soul has to travel 37 miles to the houses of parliament meaning he has to get up early to arrive on time even after a long session in Parliament that might leave him with only four or five hours sleep.
Does he think that all the other workers in their various professions who work long hours and have to commute to London (some a lot more than 37 miles) warrant an expense account from their employers? Thousands of workers all over Britain have to commute to work with long tedious journeys hampered with road congestion at their own expense, so why do M.Ps. think that they are entitled to claim expenses or buy lavish houses at the tax payers expense when their need is no greater that anyone else.
Another question that needs to be asked is, if they only need the second houses for two or three hours sleep why do they have to have luxurious accommodation with so many rooms to furnish (at our expense again)with every mod con available when a simple bedsit would suffice? Also as I have said before, when the houses paid by us are no longer needed and are sold the money should go back into the coffers and not to the rip off M.Ps.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

No comments:

Post a Comment