How the fuck is this legal??

  • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    May as well name and shame:

    Four ministers (Duncan Webb, Jan Tinetti, Deborah Russell and Willie Jackson) claimed the capped allowance, of up to $45,000 a year, to cover living costs in the city. They then use it to pay rent on property they already own.

    Four Government MPs (Arena Williams, Jenny Salesa, Jamie Strange and Sarah Pallet) claim an entitlement of up to $31,000 per year.

    Twelve National Party MPs, including leader Christopher Luxon, do the same. They are: Andrew Bayly; Gerry Brownlee; Judith Collins; Jacqui Dean; Barbara Kuriger; Melissa Lee; Ian McKelvie; Mark Mitchell; Simon O’Connor; Stuart Smith; Louise Upston and Michael Woodhouse.

    ACT’s Simon Court also claims the allowance and owns property in the Capital, but the party did not respond to a request for comment.

  • Xcf456@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Govt should just build a big apartment building near Parliament and they can stay in that while in Wellington. If MPs want to live somewhere else they pay for it themselves

    • master5o1@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Like student dorms, separated by party affiliation? Or current standard Kāinga Ora units?

      • Xcf456@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Student dorms, two to a room with random assignment across parties to encourage maximum sitcom-esque situations like drawing a line down the middle of the room

      • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        For who ? Labour that refused to bring in land reform or national who wish to have the highest house prices in the world oced ?

        I wonder which one I should bite for ?

        Politicians are corrupt civil servants. Remove them and get in people who actually want to improve the average kiwis life.

        • Xcf456@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The Greens, who have a comprehensive tax policy with relief targeted at the lower end and rebalancing the tax take to come from capital gains and wealth instead of being heavily weighted to taxing work and consumption.

            • Xcf456@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well hey, if it’s consistent with your values and what you want out of a political party why not? The beauty of our electoral system is you don’t have to just vote for Labour or national. Yes one of them will be in govt but the more votes the minors get the more they can push for things

                • Xcf456@lemmy.nz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Agree, I was talking generally there but my overall point was - it sounds like the kinds of things you’re after are Greens policy, so you should vote for the Greens :)

        • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶@lemmy.nzOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Greens for free dental. And all that ‘improve the lower classes wellbeing’ stuff.

          I’m sure there’s a good joke to be made about voting for Greens for dental and coming back to bite you because you have teeth when you’re 80 or something.

          • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            What are greens offering? Dental for over 60s ? Under 10s. Greens are a good shout but prefer unfortunately to vote labour just so I don’t get national

            • Longpork_afficianado@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Voting greens if is effectively still a vote for labour, as theyre unlikely to get 60 seats on their own. Its just a vote that lets them pput more pressure on labour when forming a coalition.

              • TagMeInSkipIGotThis@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Some would argue that voting Green is better than voting Labour as it forces Labour / gives Labour cover to do left-wing things while campaigning as centre-right.

        • TagMeInSkipIGotThis@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          There are more than two parties in New Zealand. And Politicians are not civil servants; at least not in the way that term is traditionally used.

          • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Obviously but that doesn’t mean it’s a two party fight. More than two parties in most countries. And funnily Enough it’s usually one of three.

            Any other useful advice or ?

    • jeff11@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t forget to heckle them and send some hate mail to your local council. I’m doing my part, I hope you’re doing yours ;-)

  • liv@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I seem to remember someone getting pinged out for this about 15 years ago and it being quite a scandal.

    Now it’s what they all do. We’re being boiled like the apocryphal frogs.

  • TagMeInSkipIGotThis@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just want to point out something that regularly gets overlooked whenever this is brought up.

    1. I think its a bad look and ideally shouldn’t happen, but…
    2. The government would be paying rent to someone for these MPs so as long as its market rent, its not costing the taxpayer any more than it otherwise would.
    3. Local constituency offices are regularly worked out a similar way and again its the same deal, if they’re funded by the govt, then the govt would be paying someone, its just who its going to that’s a bit off.
    4. I’d be all in favour of Kainga Ora building a housing precinct of affordable, simple homes - ie the type we desperately need, and any MP that doesn’t want to pay for their own accomodation from their own salary can have one of those to occupy.
    • Xcf456@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it’s a huge conflict of interest when it’s MPs’ own properties. Essentially taxpayer funds are supporting the accumulation of untaxed capital gains for every MP who does this. Its yet another example of why our housing policy is so borked when those elected to make the rules are so compromised in multiple ways.

      I like your idea of KO building purpose accommodation for MPs.

    • Dave@lemmy.nzM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I considered making this argument, but I decided I don’t mind if it’s the same money going to someone else, it should be an arms length transaction. Not to yourself, not to your husband or friend or friend’s mum.

      The idea of MP accommodation does sound good. How do you handle families? Backbencher salaries are not that great when you tell them they have to pay for two houses. I’m sure many MPs have partners and kids stay with them in Wellington at times.

      • TagMeInSkipIGotThis@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh I agree 100%, it should just be something that’s not allowed so there’s no question of impropriety.

        MP accommodation should be easy enough, a pool of housing some apartments, some townhouses and some 3-4 bed etc. Ideally built to social housing standards by Kainga Ora, because if its good enough for an average family it should be good enough for an MP.

        Oh and potentially Kainga Ora should research the standard operating practises of private landlords and apply that to MPs as well ;)

        • ciaocibai@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not sure what the situation is now, but they used to keep a pool of houses in Wellington for MP’s and their families to live in but like everything many have been sold off over the years. It makes sense to have them available as these representatives need to be in Wellington, but renting them back from the owners like this sounds weird.

  • biddy@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    They don’t? They all get an accommodation supplement for when they’re staying in Wellington, which some choose to use on an owned home.

    • Dave@lemmy.nzM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can you point to some evidence that all MPs recieve this? I can only find a reimbursement for costs that has a cap.