Throwing the baby out with the bathwater
Wednesday, 16 December 2009
Yesterday the McIntosh Report was published offering a review on expenses in the Scottish Parliament with the headline decision being that MSP's should be immediately banned from employing any more family members and those who are currently employed by family members should lose their jobs by 2015.
But just look at what McIntosh actually says about employing family members, first quoting another report:
"It was a matter for MSPs to determine whom they wish to employ to provide the necessary services in support of parliamentary and constituency work, and did not consider it right to disqualify relatives from being employed purely on that basis."
But then he says:
"The issue I have to address is whether such an arrangement can continue to command public confidence."
So the people hate it? Well not quite:
"the report on public attitudes raised this as an issue which generated a range of opinions."
So that's hardly conclusive. I just can't help shake off the feeling that this has nothing to do with employing family members at all but some petty pride at being 'purer' than Westminster and trying to keep up with what is going on down south rather than actually looking at what is actually the fair thing to do.
And of course MSP's already have to declare if they employ any relatives so there is not an issue with transparency. There's nothing illegal or even immoral about it so why not let the voters judge for themselves if they can stomach it or not?
This is all acting as a response to Derek Conway paying his family without asking them to do any work. That's illegal and immoral and should obviously never have been allowed to happen but the vast majority of people who work for an MSP work extremely hard and in my experience that is amplified by those who work for a relative.
What do you do if you have been involved in politics form your teenage years, became very active within the party an a few years after graduating went to work for your local MSP. It's something which a lot of people have done and a route which most people who work for politicians have gone through but what then if your local MSP happens to be a relative? Does that mean that your banned from working for them despite being eminently qualified?
It's not a personal point not being related to any politician nor a party political point as politicians across the political spectrum employ relatives, it's just a genuine belief that we are in danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater here.
Posts
8 comments:
"what then if your local MSP happens to be a relative?"
Comute to another area
Or work for your local MP ...unless of couse (s)he is related as well! ( It does happen, if happening)
Oh how my heart bleads for the unlucky souls whom life has dealt such a disadvantaged hand.
And even the unluckiest has six years to find a new job!
What do you do if you have been involved in politics form your teenage years, became very active within the party an a few years after graduating went to work for your local MSP. It's something which a lot of people have done and a route which most people who work for politicians have gone through but what then if your local MSP happens to be a relative? Does that mean that your banned from working for them despite being eminently qualified?
There's no shortage of people who meet this definition of "eminently qualified", so the MSP can just employ one of the ones who isn't related to them. I don't see how the public loses out by that.
How many businesses are run by family members?
being family does not equal being corrupt it is how they are employed not who they are.
problem is most civil servants really do not have clue how the OUTSIDE world works.
Mr. Mxyzptlk
Lots of business are run by family members - its usually the genesis of their decline or bankrupcy.
But the difference is it's their own funeral, not a state funded one.
So. of an MSP's potential 40,000 or so employees ( and that's just the local ones), the "best qualified" one just happens to be their wife or son?
This long overdue reform is a no brainer - if the wife son etc are so great, go find a job elsewhere - anywhere at all, except another state funded household income where the sole judge of suitabilty is your papa!
And from this much other graft and corruption flows - if you can get you son a job, whats in it for you daughters, cousins, mum in law, best pall, guy you know in the pub...........just send me a receipt and ill pass it on to the parliamentary allowances office
The trouble I have with this is that it appears simply down to some bad eggs everyone will have to toe a line that will weaken Scottish politics.
Politics has always been a family affair and even if they are not employed do you not think that the spouse of an MSP will not be involved in the politics. The public and the press certainly dont expect it to be otherwise.
So will there have to be a form of privacy law imposed to stop people snooping on the spouses since they will not be in law involved in politics unless elected themselves.
I wonder how many relatives are members of local party committees etc will they have to resign as well.
lost highlander - I dont think the spouse of a Headteacher, Chief Police Officer, or Hospital consultant is any less "involved" than the spouse of an MSP. But imagine the outcry - with MSPs leading the charge - were any one of them to use taxpayers money to employ a relative. even a fairly distant one with no interview etc on the basis that they were "the best person for the job". Ot worse still, on the basis. "its always been a family affair".
Nothing wrong with relatives being involved, its being paid for this in preference to anybody else that is the issue.
As for you assertion politics "has always has been a family afffair", I kind of agree with you. But this is a problem. and in some areas a big one, not a virtue and certainly not something we should be institutionalising with state funded second, and in some cases, third family incomes.
An MSP that can only function with paid assistance of a relative aint the type of representative I want. Nor do i want one that cant see the very obvious conflict of interest.
Anon - I don't know if it applies retroactively. But if it does, so what?
I can't believe there's so much opposition to these utterly tame proposals. All this stuff about "what if, by some freak coincidence, the most qualified person happens to be the son of the MSP/MP?" - is this really supposed to be a serious objection?
"what if an msp employs a researcher, then they get married or whatever. does the msp then need to sack their researcher/new spouse?"
Is that you George?
Only kidding!
Post a Comment