Sunday, 10 May 2009

Offensive Expenses


you have to wonder why MP's get paid a salary at all when you take a glance at the freshly published list of expenses which came out of Westminster only this week. the comical highlight had to be the use of public money on a box of tampons (the claim not even from a female MP - not that we should judge a man for what he rams up his arse) At the other end of the spectrum the moral low light a set of pricey home improvements for a house neither in the MP's constituency nor anywhere near Westminster (the MP in question has released a statement via the BBC's daily politics show but i would rather not include it in the interest of keeping this argument as one-sided as possible).

I thought expenses were meant to make sure that being a member of parliament was affordable for anyone who took the job not a "cream as much as you can" challenge. To date i have paid about £300 in tax on my humble earnings as a part time retail assistant this year - but i thought i was paying to keep people alive through the NHS? or paying to keep the streets free of crime through our police force? or at the very least i liked to think i was contributing to the refining of some uranium for use in a big bully boy nuke!... but alas - i was actually paying for Jackie Smiths Genuine leatherette sofa (or maybe a copy of "Super Titty Bang 3: Suffocation" for her unfortunate husband).

The resulting outcry is for MPs to no longer have expenses - but i disagree. As mentioned in the very first line of this proudly unbalanced analysis - why do they get paid a salary at all when every thing they could ever need, from male tampons to double glazed conservatories, are claimed on expenses? the answer is: they shouldn't. keep the expenses, loose the salary... be a shame not to have a use for all those dishonest money grabbing skills wouldn't it?

have I been unfair? tell you what: I'm happy to be sued for defamation by any member of parliament just so long as they use their own money to pay for their legal team and not the tax payers'... not such an appealing offer now eh?

No comments:

Post a Comment