There were two votes yesterday on a Free Vote. As they were on a Free Vote I feel I should explain my logic for voting as I did.
A report from the Independent Monitoring Commission initially called for a suspension of the members allowances for the MPs that don't take their seats in the house of commons. (Sinn Fein). This same group concluded recently that matters had changed and hence the allowances should be restored. These allowances are mainly used to support constituents.
Additionally the government proposed that SF be given a sum of money equivalent to the "Short Money" that is used to fund parties' research into policy matters on legislation. Given that SF do not attend the House they do not get involved in these matters in the same way. Hence this equates moreso to a bung than a source of finance to support their work on legislation.
Motion 3 was to provide the Short Money equivalent - I voted against.
Motion 4 was to reinstate the constituency allowance - I vote for.
Both motions were passed with Tony Blair voting for both motions.
A report from the Independent Monitoring Commission initially called for a suspension of the members allowances for the MPs that don't take their seats in the house of commons. (Sinn Fein). This same group concluded recently that matters had changed and hence the allowances should be restored. These allowances are mainly used to support constituents.
Additionally the government proposed that SF be given a sum of money equivalent to the "Short Money" that is used to fund parties' research into policy matters on legislation. Given that SF do not attend the House they do not get involved in these matters in the same way. Hence this equates moreso to a bung than a source of finance to support their work on legislation.
Motion 3 was to provide the Short Money equivalent - I voted against.
Motion 4 was to reinstate the constituency allowance - I vote for.
Both motions were passed with Tony Blair voting for both motions.
Comments