Bawling and shouting
Here's a wee thought to whet your appetites while we wait for first minister's questions, here at Holyrood.
I'm told there are still big differences among the parties about how to implement the new scheme for MSPs' office allowances.
So big that the prospect now looms that the issue might have to be argued out in the chamber instead of being settled by negotiated agreement.
You'll remember that Sir Alan Langlands chaired a review of allowances.
His team recommended scrapping the system of funding the purchase of a second home along with a range of other reforms, designed to save money and placate the public.
The big issue dividing the parties is whether to end the present parity of treatment for constituency and regional list MSPs.
Breach fairness
Sir Alan concluded there should be a maximum of £62,000 paid to a constituency member's staff team - with list members restricted to £45,000.
Those supporting this position argue that constituency members have a far bigger case load. Those against say it would create two castes of MSP and breach basic fairness.
Very broadly, the Tories and the SNP favour parity. Labour backs the Langlands position. The Liberal Democrats are seeking a compromise.
The parties have perhaps a fortnight or three weeks in which to sort this. Otherwise, we're back to what happened in 1999 when MSPs were left arguing about their own cash on the floor of the chamber.
I'm told all sides want a deal. One participant said the talks have been serious - but sensible with no "bawling or shouting". Save that for FMQs, eh?
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~29~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
it is no wonder why the cost of living has increased, these people are supposed to work for us and should be paid no more than the average wage we get which according to some people is £20,000 pa.
if that had to happen then we would see the wealth of Scotland increase as well as the cost of living decrease.
Complain about this comment
Yesterday, Brian wrote Prime Minister's Questions with capital letters. Today, first minister's questions has no capital letters. Just an observation.
Complain about this comment
Typicall the right-wing parties want to ensure they have their pockets filled, the Labour bunch run to the opposite corner and the Lib Dems stand in the middle waving their arms in the air telling everyone they are in the wrong but refusing to actually say what they would do differently. The most ludicrous thing about this fiasco is the MSP's themselves wont be affected, it will be the hardworking staff they employ in their offices that bare the brunt of any cuts in allowances.
Many of these so-called public servants live the nigh life with state fueled and paid for cars to take them to their favourite indian or all expenses paid taxis for their nearest and dearest, and to make things worse they dont eve nwant to admit what they are doing trying to hide it claiming that they dont want people to know where they are or what they are doing for fears of their own safety.
Lets be honest we at least know where they arent, and their offices doingtheir job.
Complain about this comment
The positions the parties take on this ties up very nicely with the percentage of their MSPs that are constituency based.
The SNP and Tories, 45% and 24% of their MSPs being constituency based respectively, support parity.
The Lib Dems, 69% constituency based, support a compromise.
Labour, overwhelmingly constituency based at 80%, support higher payouts for constituency members.
Snouts in the trough, whatever way you look at it.
Complain about this comment
I take it that now Iain Mcmillan has made a statement calling for an immediate referendum on independence he will be withdrawing from the Calman commission since he is obviously part of the Wendy team. How much longer will Gordon Brown allow this silly woman to play at politics, her stupid posturing and flogging of a dead horse must be doing tremendous damage not only to her party in Scotland but also to the remains of the party in Westminster.(though this is no bad thing,the Labour party has regressed to the 1920s under the stewardship of Brown in a few short months.) Alec Salmond is so far ahead of Brown and Alexander both intellectually and politically that had they been engaged in a boxing match the board of control would have ruled it an unfair contest. Auntie Annabel on the other hand has enough savvy to realise that playing the benevolent aunt and not rocking the boat will in the long run do her more good than harm. Wee Nicol on the other hand should stick to writing nasties on the blackboard when the teacher's out of the room, because nothing he comes out with is of any particular relevance to what is actually going on.
Complain about this comment
Masingo at #3
It would appear that you are muddying the waters in Holyrood with Westminster's muck! MSPs are strictly controllled with receipts required for small amounts and it is open to scrutiny far more than doon sooth.
As for the offices - staff are required by both types of MSP and the type of work is slightly different. The staff are governed by rules too-far more transparent than the Westminster lot.
It is interesting that the Labour lot, in particular,seem to think that the constituency MSP is different. Now that they have more list MSPs will they realise that they do have a role to play?
The problem over housing is a thorny one. Of course, those outwith daily travelling distance, need somewhere to stay, with 'privacy'. and their constituents(be they list or constituency) are as entitled to representation as anyone from the central belt. It is a pity, a lot of folk in the Central Belt refuse to acknowledge that fact.
Complain about this comment
Kurisu at 4
That is a good point well made...
but it does leave one in the position of "damned if you do, damned if you don't" somewhat.
Take the SNP and Tories as an example, could it be that parity is the just and right course of action, nothing to do with that fact that it would benefit their members more than the alternatives?
Hmmm...I realise that sounds naive, and I am not saying that is necessarily true, I'm just raising the point...
Complain about this comment
raven2571 - think of the size of the budget that MSPs have responsibility for implementing (in government) and scrutinising (in opposition) - and MPs, for that matter. Bigger than a lot of large companies.
The pay has to reflect this and the experience needed to do the job, and while it might be arguable that some (though far from all) MSPs do not have the required competencies to do the job that probably says more both about the electoral system and the various parties' selection procedures than the pay structure.
In terms of the actual benefits, there's no reason why, if a list MSP is doing his job properly, he shouldn't have the same amount of casework as a constituency MSP. You could actually use the argument for the separation to make the point that constituency MSPs shouldn't be ministers, as their caseload is too big.
Of course, all of this could be corrected if all MSPs were equal in constituency and we used the STV system as for councils.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS