Chancellor Rachel Reeves this week caused a few eyebrows to be raised when, in the wake of axing the winter heating allowance for the vast majority of pensioners, she defended claiming expenses for energy bills at her second home.
šĀ Read our report here
Ā
Today one of our readers puts forward a radical alternative.
Alan FitzpatrickĀ ofĀ DunlopĀ writes:
"Rachel Reeves indulges in some mental gymnastics in insisting that it was difficult but worthwhile for her Government to decide to means-test the annual Ā£300 winter fuel payment to pensioners in an attempt to save some money, whilst in effect insisting it would not be right for her to be means-tested similarly for Ā£600 she has been claiming, and will no doubt continue to claim, annually for her energy costs in her London home because that is no more than the long-standing rule. So what? Why not abolish that rule in her declared mission to save some money? MPs, let alone Chancellors, would fail any means test as they earn more than enough to pay their way.
Another difficult but worthwhile decision to make?
As for her argument that MPs 'have to have a house in London', why, and why does it have to be 'a house'? Their tenure can only be temporary so why not accommodate them in a hotel or equivalent, like the migrants? One readily available facility that springs to mind is the currently redundant Bibby Stockholm which has accommodation for 500. It could be tied up conveniently on the Thames alongside the Parliamentary buildings to house the MPs and keep them snug and warm (again just like it was intended for the migrants) on the days when they must be in London. Think of the savings that difficult but worthwhile decision could bring."
Get the Letter of the Day straight to your inbox.
Read moreĀ inĀ our Letters page
Letters should not exceed 500 words. We reserve the right to edit submissions.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.Ā
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience forĀ our loyalĀ readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.Ā
That is invaluable.Ā
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalistās job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readersā comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readersā comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the āreport this postā link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel