Earlier on this week I wrote to Linlithgow and Falkirk MP Michael Connarty asking him to back the move not to exempt MPs expenses from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Bill. With the speed of all the action the usual prompt response I get from my opponent from 2005 was not forthcoming before the dramatic U-Turn of Gordon Brown on Wednesday.
I thought nothing more of it until I read in the Press and Journal that Michael despite claiming to supply receipts to back all his expense claims deems the process to meet it for FOI "ridiculous and tiresome".
Is he saying that transparency to the electorate is tiresome and not worth the effort? Especially when what would be involved appears to be as he claims no more than he does already. What does he mean that is is ridiculous that myself and the other people he represents would be able to get details of their councillors expenses but not their MPs? To me such as proposal to exempt MPs from this legislation is ridiculous.
Also for such a fervent supporter of ID cards as Connarty it is hypocritical. He wants to gather all you personal and biometric data and store it on a data base but is not prepared because of the ridiculous and tiresome nature to let you know how he is paying your taxes.
Or put another way Michael is prepared to learn all about you but not you tell you how he spends your money, if he could get away with it.
I've written to Mr Connarty asking him to explain why he is the 2nd most expensive MP in the Commons, and also to the Telegraph asking if they've gotten around to his expenses claims yet. I look forward to his reply, although I doubt I'll get one. If he has been claiming anything not directly relating to his job as an MP I will report him to the police. Like most people, my patience with self-serving MP's is now exhausted.
ReplyDeleteArlen he did vote against the major reforms that some are know leaping upon as a good idea last summer. Although he is remaining largely quiet.
ReplyDelete