Saturday, 2 May 2009

Why did Lembit vote to keep the second home allowance for Outer London MPs?

I was reading the Evening Standard on the train yesterday when I came across this article: MPs say they face hardship after axing second homes cash.

It had details of some of the MPs ("rebels") who voted against scrapping the second home allowance for outer London MPs. Given our London MPs' sterling record on second homes (they don't have any!), I was enjoying going through the list of Labour and Conservative MPs who opposed the scrapping. Imagine my surprise, dissapointment and annoyance when I came across:

  • Lembit Opik (Lib Dem), Montgomeryshire

What was he thinking of? Was he objecting to the way the whole expenses vote had been handled? If so, may I suggest that this nuance isn't going to come across in "the court of public opinion"!

Surely all out MPs should have been voting to scrap this? Isn't this Nick's position? Now we can't say all our MPs voted to scrap the allowance. Saying we all did excpet one doesn't cut it.

Is there a rational explanation for this?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Cpuld it be because Lembit Opik made money in renting out his London flat whilst living with his then fiancee 5 years ago? First to the brother of a fellow Lib Dem MP and then to his Montgomeryshire agent. Said fiancee also, it seems, paid the mortgage on their hous ein his constitunecy. A win win situation for the greedy O'Pickled. But then one must assume that his gregarious barfly lifestyle comes at a price