Your views: on ambiguity, allowances and election strategy
Today, readers comment on the MP accommodation claim scandal, and the Libs unleashing a “Blue Army” at the 2022 state election.
Photo: Tony Lewis / InDaily
Commenting on the story: Country claims crisis: ICAC to investigate all entitlements dating back 10 years
Parliamentarians have their snouts and their trotters in the trough.
No wonder they want to reduce government services to reduce costs. They want to screw the taxpayer for all they can and have the money to rort the system.
Ambiguity, my foot.
If Knoll claimed he paid his parents, did they declare this income on their tax returns?
The whole thing stinks. I am a pensioner and they are claiming nearly twice as much as I get paid, just in accommodation expenses. – Mark Eckermann
As an employee in private business, I too have to abide by the “actual expenses” rule.
If I get a receipt and it is within my reasonable company guideline, I get the money reimbursed. If I don’t get a receipt, I have to pay for it. It is simple, and very difficult to make false claims or mistakes.
For these members of parliament to think its OK to make a claim with no documentation, blame others for mistakes and then pay it back only if they think they will get caught is appalling.
It is not an entitlement, it is meant to cover genuine out-of pocket expenses.
Our politicians need to remember they are in reality public servants and should be serving – not fleecing – us.
And if they do “accidentally” over-claim, perhaps they should pay back double. Then I am sure it would never happen again. – Russell Martyn
Commenting on the story: Revealed: Lib plan to “reactive the base” in election strategy briefing
The Liberal Party turned on their “base” when they persisted with their unfair land tax aggregation reforms.
They called investors tax cheats, although they purchased property in the laws of the time.
Their “base” will remember them come election time. – Patricia Zollo
Want to comment?
Send us an email, making it clear which story you’re commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put “Reader views” in the subject.
We’ll publish the best comments in a regular “Reader Views” post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.
