Wednesday, June 03, 2009

Take the trough away from the country's highest-paid beneficiaries

Here's a thought.

We know from the British expenses scandal that British politicans will take whatever they can get.

We know from Labour's pledge card scandal, Jonathan Hunt's taxi bill and the accomodation rorts by the likes of Bunkle and Hobbs that local politicians will do the same when they can.

And we know from the truckloads of taxpayers' money being used to campaign in Mt Albert that nothing's changed since, and that when they can take advantage they will.

Why should you and I pay extra for Phil Goff's power and rent, when he's already on a good taxpaid wicket.

Why should we pay for Russel Norman 's taxis, when he wants to make everyone else use the bus.

Why should people who don't even like the ACT Party pay for the running costs of their communications and research staff?

Why should we accede to the claims bubbling under that it shouldn't just be MPs and their spouses that are paid by the taxpayer to go about their business, but political parties as well?

In short, we know that if there's a trough around then these bastards will want to get their snout into it -- and even in our neck of the wooods there's one hell of a trough. [Scroll down a little to see a partial list]

So instead of holding another "cross-party" committee meeting to decide what to do about it here -- a meeting of those whose noses are in the trough to see how they can continue to get away with it -- why not simply take the trough away.

Instead of paying every dollar it takes to run these pricks  -- instead of paying all their expenses and then some -- taxis, hotels, travel, rents, mortages, carpet-bagging, a very nice superannuation package -- why not just pay them the very nice salary they're already getting, and let them pay their own bloddy expenses out of that.

After all, that's what everyone else is expected to do, right?

Just take the trough away from these beneficiaries, and let them pay their own way themselves. That would be the honest thing to do, wouldn't it?

10 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

When I saw your headline,I thought you were talking about farmers.surely the most cosseted collective in this country.

6/03/2009 12:26:00 pm  
Blogger PC said...

Cosseted how, anonymous?

6/03/2009 12:34:00 pm  
Blogger Luke H said...

Anonymous must be confusing us with Europe or the US.

6/03/2009 12:43:00 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Free water,free waste dispersal,exclusive use of public property for recreational purposes,beneficiaries of overly generous tenure review.Exclusive use of a public resource for commercial gain ,peppercorn rentals,given a soft option re ets.slack animal laws,able to disregard by laws with impunity.

6/03/2009 01:10:00 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Even if they were cosseted they actually produce things that are useful and of benefit to the rest of us, unlike our politians for the most part. I agree with the sentiment " buy your own car and pay for your own food and housing out of your pay" just like the rest of us. Same for all govt employees.

6/03/2009 02:02:00 pm  
Anonymous Sus said...

Exclusive use of "public" property/resource for recreational purposes/commercial gain?

6/03/2009 02:37:00 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Farmers should compete with each other for grazing rights on leasehold land,to ensure a commercial return for the owners.

6/03/2009 03:03:00 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes its time private interests get their snouts out of the public trough.Stealing public assets and selling them back ,is Acts definition of increased productivity.

6/03/2009 03:16:00 pm  
Blogger Clunking Fist said...

Ignore the Anons, they are a clever ploy to create confusion. And not just amongst themselves.

6/03/2009 07:36:00 pm  
Anonymous Mr Dennis said...

You'd want to leave a certain amount of transport paid for however in my opinion. Without that your MP would either spend most of their time in Wellington and hardly ever visit the electorate, or most of their time in the electorate and avoid going to Wellington. State-funded airfares let them function as a local MP.

With no travel perks, Wellington residents would be fine but Dunedin residents wouldn't see their "local" MP very often.

There's probably a lot that could be trimmed, but I wouldn't jump to conclusions too rashly.

6/04/2009 09:40:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Respond with a polite and intelligent comment. (Both will be applauded.)

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. (Do others the courtesy of being honest.)

Please put a name to your comments. (If you're prepared to give voice, then back it up with a name.)

And don't troll. Please. (Contemplate doing something more productive with your time, and ours.)

<< Home