Political expenses should be real – not a racket
If an expenses regime is so lacking in transparency, how can the public have a scintilla of confidence in it?
If it is difficult to explain an expenses regime designed by politicians for the benefit of themselves in terms that the general public would regard as fair, reasonable and appropriate. That alone is a powerful argument against such a system.
Voters expect politicians personally to be responsible and accountable for the expenses they claim.
They expect claims to be based only on the reimbursement of costs which are wholly, exclusively and unavoidably necessary in the performance of parliamentary duties.
They also expect a level of integrity and verification that is characterised by a high standard of honesty and probity.
Voters will not tolerate politicians being personally enriched at public expense.
Why, for example, should politicians be able to claim travel expenses in respect of journeys when they do not use their own vehicles or are eligible for free travel on public transport?
The concept of claiming travel expenses from a variety of widely dispersed personal addresses is indefensible and unacceptable.
If the select committee on members’ interests investigation determines that payments have been made on foot of expense claims which ought not to have been admissible they must insist on the immediate reimbursement of such monies, plus interest, before considering other sanctions.
At the end of last month the cost of interest on the national debt was equivalent to 44% of all income tax revenues collected to date in 2010.
If the Government intends to further penalise taxpayers in forthcoming budgets, or whenever, is it not reasonable that issues such as inadmissible politicians’ expenses are promptly resolved at no burden to the same taxpayers?
Myles Duffy
Bellevue Ave
Gleneageary
Co Dublin






