Why are Labour wasting the time of the Scottish Parliament when this is already settled?
http://tinyurl.com/5wdrg7
Labour MSPs are engulfed in a civil war over plans to change their allowances
The argument could also be purely academic because the SNP, Tories and Greens have already decided to change the recommendation to give MSPs the same amount of money and have enough votes to win.
To me this comment was more interesting as it is going part way to removing some of the snouts from the trough!
Sir Alan's recommendation on the Edinburgh accommodation allowance is to be agreed without much debate. MSPs will no longer be allowed to use the £11,400 allowance to invest in the Edinburgh property market and will only be able to rent.

I wonder if Wasteminster will follow suit - but I wouldn't hold your breath on that!

Oh dear me, I do not see a difference between £11K+ spent in the property market and £11k+ spent by paying it to some buy to let landlord. If we are going to give this to MSPs then give it to them. If it is used towards a mortgage or rent what is the difference to the tax payer.

This is nit picking at its worst.

My choice would be for the parliament to buy up houses and let MSPs live in them fully furnished for the time they work in Edinburgh.

We will find the Labour MSPs with money to burn will probably be the buy to let landlords anyway.

I find list MSPs probably work just as hard if not harder for any person who contacts them. They want to prove themselves, they want the seat next time round. What most folk forget is the e-mails sent at 11/12/pm the telephone calls late at night, these people are still working then, just as constituency MSPs do. They all spend MON + Fri in their constituency office and Tues/Wed/Thurs in Parliament. Many work on a Saturday too.

Many share office space with the local MP if they are from the same party.

I do not like this two tear system.

List MSPs will get as many opportunities to work for constituents, as a person will ask the MSP from the party they support if the constituency MSP is not of their party. How then is it considered that their office will cost less to run.

Lydia wrote: This is nit picking at its worst.
I disagree about nitpicking Lydia. I believe that this is intended to stop the worst excesses of those who use taxpayers money to buy property in Edinburgh and then walk away with the profits. It is totally unfair that these people should receive what amount to subsidised mortgages. See: http://tinyurl.com/5f94v4 One excerpt from the article quotes: Nicol Stephen's property empire includes a s400,000 Edinburgh home that he now rents out after pocketing around s50,000 of taxpayers' cash on it.
Your other suggestion: My choice would be for the parliament to buy up houses and let MSPs live in them fully furnished for the time they work in Edinburgh. makes a lot of sense provided the properties are owned by the taxpayer so that any profits on sale of those properties is returned to the public purse. It would be an easy matter to set a board of trustees to administer the scheme.

Re: Introducing a different mode of treatment between list and constituency MSPs will not be passed. The idea is being thrown out!

CTV.ca News




"The prime minister and his family may have to pack up and find a new temporary home if they heed the advice of Canada's auditor general.

A report released by Sheila Fraser on Tuesday states that "24 Sussex Drive (is) showing signs of fatigue and wear, and (requires) extensive repair work."

The repairs are estimated to cost about $10 million, and the report notes that "prolonged access to 24 Sussex Drive will be required for rehabilitation of the residence." That would require the prime minister and his family to move out for up to 15 months."

This place gets a couple of million spent on redecoration every year and now they need a ten million renovation? Enough to make you weep. One of my brothers built a three story, state of the art, office block with attached conference centre in the same city for 5.3 m two years ago - inflation?

I can see MSP's getting into the buy to let and rent back to themselves market

There is a ready made solution to all of this. Park a redundant prison ship in Leith Docks, (next to Brittania perhaps?), and give them bus tokens for the trip to and from the Docs.
This will solve the accommodation problems at a stroke.

DoricMan wrote:
There is a ready made solution to all of this. Park a redundant prison ship in Leith Docks, (next to Brittania perhaps?), and give them bus tokens for the trip to and from the Docs.
This will solve the accommodation problems at a stroke.

Excellent. But will they let Jackie on the boat? Could be H&S implications

too good fur them

scunnert wrote:
CTV.ca News




"The prime minister and his family may have to pack up and find a new temporary home if they heed the advice of Canada's auditor general.

A report released by Sheila Fraser on Tuesday states that "24 Sussex Drive (is) showing signs of fatigue and wear, and (requires) extensive repair work."

The repairs are estimated to cost about $10 million, and the report notes that "prolonged access to 24 Sussex Drive will be required for rehabilitation of the residence." That would require the prime minister and his family to move out for up to 15 months."

This place gets a couple of million spent on redecoration every year and now they need a ten million renovation? Enough to make you weep. One of my brothers built a three story, state of the art, office block with attached conference centre in the same city for 5.3 m two years ago - inflation?

Maybe he could be persuaded to move to Canada or any other country really

sadsack wrote:
too good fur them

Now that is a wee bit rough some MSPs are very dedicated people but with any collection of people you get the good and the bad. If people would protest more the bad ones, the dishonest ones, the people only in this parliament of ours for money and prestige would be given a harder time of it. Everybody voting might just help.