Why should they OWN the house?
The main thing I don't understand is why they get to own the house, as well as all the extra expenditure on top. Surely it would be more cost effective if the houses were owned by the government outright, perhaps each constituency has the house for example. That way whoever is the MP for a particular constituency would live in that house in London and then they would have to give it up when they leave. If all the interior was owned by the constituency as well then the amount spent every year on new items would be much less, or older items would be sold and put back into government spending. The way things are done now is completely atroshious and not the most financially productive way to do things. If the relationship was more like a Landlord to tennent, where the landlord covers the repairs and furnishing of the property but the tennent has to leave once their contract is up, it would probably be much fairer and put more money in the coffers for spending.
Of course, the best way to improve things would be to improve the current stock of MPs and have decent people who do actually care about the country and would not spend the budget just for the sake of it. All expenditures should be made public knowledge (if they are spending tax payers money then tax payers should be notified how it is spent) and people should be allowed to question these spendings. An MPs dossier should also include their proposed expenditures and what the taxpayer will have to pay for them to run in government, that way if you think they will all be useless you could vote for the one that will cost less!!!
Paris as she would probably be more competant than some of our MPs
Biting the hand that feeds IT
