The Parliamentary Communications Allowance (aka part of MPs’ expenses, provided to help them do their job as MPs) …
… has paid for this magazine from Labour MP Glenda Jackson…
… which includes this question asking people which political party they prefer …
… with the data then being passed to the Labour Party:
And so the question: why is the Labour Party using Parliamentary funds to gather in canvass data for its own use?
Share:
'This NHS Bill is Bad...' My latest blog post for The Huffington Post!
A departure from tradition at the Islington Liberal Democrats new year party...
Friday favourite 45
LibDem Activists Need to Relax Too, Sometimes
Off for training in the morning...
Dowery Dell viaduct and the Southwell branch: Midlands railway gold
The Art of War: On analysis
A letter to MLB.TV
Resources and Performance; Scrutinising The Lib Dem Budget
Tory high command hits back at Conservative Home
10 Comments
Because they are sleazebags? Is anyone still surprised by this?
OK – so what we gonna be doing about it?
One for tjhe Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmstnprv/182/18203.htm
35. Members are recommended to ensure that proposed publications are fully in compliance with the requirements of the rules before they commit themselves to the relevant expenditure.
http://snipurl.com/3lv4q
No party political or campaigning material is allowable in any part of a publication funded, wholly or in part, from the allowance.
I think that report shows what a nest of vipers giving MPs taxpayers money to promote themselves with is – and that it’s not just Labour who are pushing the rules!
As for MPs circulating material which is not party political or campaigning material I think my views would be similar to those of Brian Clough when discussing players who weren’t offside as they weren’t interfering with play.
If it isn’t one of those then way are they doing it.
Interesting stuff. Glass house and stones come to mind though, as Hywel indicates with exclamation. Some of yours are famously prone to ignoring this stuff.
Producing hybrid leaflets with portcullis and the legend “parliamentary report” and Libby and what seem to be clear breaches but part funded by taxpayers. Taking paid adverts in campaigning material too.
Chris Paul’s usual “you are doing it too” response. Isnt it wonderful that there are Labour activists of such integrity that the only thing that matters is not being at the very bottom of the list of abuses…
“with portcullis and the legend “parliamentary report” and Libby and what seem to be clear breaches but part funded by taxpayers.”
Chris Paul, I suggest you learn your topic before public comment.
Party Emblems/Logos16. The use of party logos, whilst not disallowed entirely, is restricted to proportionate and discreet use; alternatively you may prefer to use the House emblem (the crowned portcullis) as this reflects the Parliamentary nature and purpose of the material being circulated.
The whole Parliamentary Communications Allowance should be scrapped.
Chris Paul might like to ponder that having party logos on probably makes these leaflets less likely to be read.
I’ve seen “Parliamentary Reports” which have nothing to do with parliament and everything to do with a having a photo of the MP and a local resident or Councillor who just happens to be standing for election soon.
Yes, isn’t it amazing how our Conservative MP just happens to send out his parliamentary report a couple of months before General, Council, Euro, London election time, without fail.
“As for MPs circulating material which is not party political or campaigning material I think my views would be similar to those of Brian Clough when discussing players who weren’t offside as they weren’t interfering with play.”
Ha ha – brilliant and very apt analogy. For those those aware of Clough/Offside quotes he said-
“If a player is not interfering with play then he shouldn’t be on the pitch.”