So, Bruce Scott took exception to an article in the Warwick Daily News regarding politicians’ travel perks, sorry “entitlements”.
His claim that he cares about each constituent is a misrepresentation, as he has completely ignored me since I dared to question his blind support of Howard’s sell-off of Telstra in 2004, against the wishes of the vast majority of those constituents. I have contacted him on other matters since then and he has continued to treat me with utter contempt. How can he represent anyone by ignoring them? I’m sure that others have been treated this way as well.
As for the travel allowances being set by an independent body, just how independent is it? If the people involved did not deliver what the politicians wanted, they would soon be out of a job.
He correctly states that MPs are elected and not their families, so how does he justify his wife travelling at taxpayers’ expense? The strict “guidelines” for travel by family members that he mentions, are something that MPs hide behind in the absence of hard and fast rules that determine what is right and wrong. Those guidelines are so loose as to be meaningless and to ensure that MPs remain unaccountable.
If Mr Scott wishes to refute anything that I have said, I challenge him to respond with a letter to the editor, although I very much doubt that he will.
Peter Andrewartha,
Stanthorp
