MP Expenses...what’s the problem?

Before I get into this I just want to say one thing, the only reason you're hearing about this now is because I've been tired. See what happened was Saturday evening I was on the couch, in and out of consciousness after a rather glorious 4-1 defeat over Marist, and my grandfather started ripping into the MP's. Normally it's at that moment in time I would enter into the fray and we would be locked into rigorous debate for the next hour. However I didn't have the energy to rouse myself from the rather enticing slumber that occurs most Saturday afternoons. So, as a result, it's been on my mind all week and if I didn't say something I would explode!

 

In this week's political headlines there has been a whole lot of hoo-ha about MP's and their expenses. Whether it's the alleged abuse of the housing supplement system, the travel perks for spouses, or other relevant expenses, it seems to be a wee bit over the top.

 

If you've sat under a rock for the last week and are unaware of what's been happening here are some links for you to have a read:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/2703883/MPs-expenses-revealed
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/2723021/Details-of-ministers-expenses-review-unveiled
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/2482175/Lets-have-a-look-at-MPs-expenses
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/2724489/Heat-on-ministers-to-repay-expenses
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/news/2706055/MPs-attribute-higher-expenses-to-remoteness
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/editorials/2720545/Editorial-Ministers-expenses

 

Since National started their term as the leaders of Aoteroa (I forgot about Maori language week so there is my attempt to make up for it) and the recession took full flight there have been calls for all MP's to be more transparent in terms of their spending. Most of this came on the back of those muppets in Britain, busted using expense accounts to pay for porn, which translated into a media field day, and given that one of the mass media's role is keeping the government accountable then it makes sense that they would jump on this band wagon. As a result, all of the party's have come forth with information about their expenses. Fortunately our MP's have been a bit more onto it and their hotel indiscretions are yet to be paid for out of the public coffers, however their levels of housing allowances and the use of travel for spouses and children has been highlighted as potential areas for debate.

 

As it stands our MP's currently have access to housing allowances to allow them to run two homes or places of residence, 1 in their electorate & 1 in Wellington. This is because they obviously need to reside in both places. They need to be in their electorate to keep on top of the local issues, as well as Wellington as that is where they can bring forth the local issues. As a result MP's are frequently travelling and spending time in different area's. For ministers, most of the time they need to be in Wellington, however for opposition MP's or those without ministerial portfolio's they are able to spend more time at home. Given the stress that this causes the government has made provisions to support our MP's with housing allowances to help them cope with financing two houses. They have also provisioned for all the necessary travels for their spouses to be able to be with them, and their children.

 

So given the good intentions behind all this, why the heck are we getting upset over large expense? We're talking about the people that are in charge of running our country, how dare we, the public which they serve, ask them to undertake this task, and then tell them that we expect them to not be spending to the depths they are and to sacrifice their relationships with their families. I would hazard a guess that most of our MP's are rather keen on the idea of being able to serve their country in the way they do, however having their families with them is not so much an added perk as it is a necessity. Aside from the obvious reasons of helping keep a family together, an MP who is able to do their job with their family by their side has less on their mind than one who is living in a different city to their family (assuming the MP and their spouse are still together). At the very minimum we have to recognize that these expenses are worth it because it means our MP's are going to be more efficient because they are less likely to be concerned about family issues.

 

One of the MP's under the thumb for this is Deputy Prime Minister Bill English. Mr English is married with 6 children. He is the MP for the Clutha-Southland electorate and is entitled to accommodation support because of this. He has been claiming $1000 per week for the costs of renting the house which he and his family have been living in, however the house is owned by the English family trust. He has also claimed $23,000 for electricity, cleaning and other related costs for living in the house. To also put this in perspective his salary is $276,600 per annum, and his wife also works as a GP (although whether or not that is full time is yet to be disclosed). Although the case can be made that Mr English is utilising the system to pay his mortgage off his Wellington house, who are we to say that's wrong? Sure the bloke is earning a more than healthy living between himself and his wife, and they're already in a rather healthy state of affairs financially, but why should the system not benefit him? Should an MP for the opposition who is earning less be entitled to more? This is sounding a lot like communism to me. The poor bugger is merely being picked upon because he's well off, and considering he's our Deputy Prime Minister, as well as Finance Minister, why are we complain? We're in the middle of the recession and the guy in charge of leading us out of it is doing well for himself... thank goodness! If he wasn't ,there would be cause for concern here because if he can't manage his own finances, can he be trusted with the country's?

 

I guess what the English example has highlighted is that this system has the potential for being exploited (for the record the previous entitlements for accommodation were unlimited, now it's capped at $700 per week, which is quite limiting for a family of 8). However before we start going after the MP's for screwing the system, I'd rather we stopped and had a bloody good look at our welfare system. I love the fact that we live in a country that has the ability to support people when they get themselves into financial trouble, I also like the new reforms that are focusing on getting people off welfare and back into the community. However where I struggle is when I hear comments from 16 year old girls that "we should just get pregnant to get more dole", to be honest that scares the hell out of me. Not only are 16 year olds contemplating getting pregnant for the sake of money, they're going to end up responsible for a child and with atrociously low levels of intelligence as evidenced by their thought process in the first place they should not be allowed their child. The other thing that gets me is when I drive past state houses in Porirua, Newtown, Riccarton, Manauka, they all have one thing in common, copious amounts of satellite dishes. How the hell can they afford Sky TV when they're living off funding from the government? If you are unemployed and can't get work give them some funds to get by, but not enough to live a comfortable lifestyle that won't encourage them off of it!

 

If we're going to start pointing fingers and aiming for communism, let's start with those feeding off the welfare state and enjoying luxury goods, before we get to the people who loyally serve this country and are trying to lead us out of not so nice economic times.