Money, money, money
It wasn't, in truth, the most elevating or entertaining debate I have witnessed in the Scottish Parliament. However, it wasn't as hideous as some had feared.
: not their salaries but the allowances which assist them to carry out their job by, for example, employing support staff.
It was, mercifully, brief: just a little more than half an hour. But it still scarcely adds to the dignity of Parliament to have MSPs bickering in public about their own funding.
The debate followed , the Principal of Dundee University.
He called for an end to the system of helping with mortgage payments for those MSPs from far-flung constituences who buy a property in Edinburgh. In future, if they want help, they'll have to rent or stay in an hotel.
That's supported on all sides. But there is division over staff allowances.
Basically, Labour favours paying constituency MSPs more in allowances than regional list members. The SNP, the Tories and the Greens want parity between constituency and list.
Two classes
These positions, of course, are entirely based upon logic, evidence and principle. They are not remotely connected with the fact that Labour members mostly occupy constituency seats while the others rely heavily on the list.
The LibDems are allowing their members a free vote. This is, of course, because of their commitment to open parliamentary democracy and not at all because they couldn't agree a common position.
Seems to me there is merit on both sides of this dispute. Citing equity, one might argue that there should not be two classes of MSP: they should receive the same support.
However, citing fairness, one might argue that constituency MSPs are likely to have a greater caseload - and, hence, require more staff. On balance, Langlands advanced that case.
The debate itself was relatively constrained: perhaps there was a folk memory of Parliament's earliest days in 1999 when a rammy over allowances soured the start of devolution.
Michael McMahon quoted LBJ as he accused Labour's rivals of orchestrating a fix. Some nodded in agreement.
Others smiled gently at this onslaught on political machination from a scion of Lanarkshire Labour.
'Offensive' move
Cathie Craigie, Labour MSP for Cumbernauld and Kilsyth, voiced disquiet with elements of the list system. She appeared to be accusing Nationalist list members of cherry-picking issues in her constituency - while her own work-load was immense.
Shortage of time prevented Ms Craigie from reminding the chamber which party was responsible for introducing the top-up list system.
That would be Labour. The best contribution came from Ross Finnie of the Liberal Democrats.
After summarising the competing cases, he closed by arguing passionately that members should be treated equally. Anything else was "offensive" and contrary to Holyrood's founding principles.
They vote tonight at five. Catch the outcome here.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Update: equity rules. to give the same allowances to constituency and list members..
I'm 
Comments
or to comment.