Comments on: Trevor outs Trevor

By: Trevor Mallard

Trevor Mallard — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:25:58 +0000

Have done – thought carefully. This post was pretty narrow and a bit of a risk – not one about general fiscal constraint.

By: Nathan Mills

Nathan Mills — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 05:05:32 +0000

With respect Trevor, I’d like you to consider reviewing the removal of my last post? I feel it IS relevant, in that it shows the lengths that other taxpayer-funded departments are going to tighten their fiscal belts. No dramas if you do feel it’s wholly off-topic, but please reconsider?

By: Sean

Sean — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:52:31 +0000

I can’t believe I read this reported back in mainstream media.

I can believe that once they decided to report it, the outlet focused in the Rugby matches, but seriously, it is a work trip where you are keeping costs low.

Easy headline I suppose, no real story.

By: al zhiemer

al zhiemer — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:51:14 +0000

With the amount of trouble you get in mr mallard you would be requiring a minder and as i happen to be available that particular time frame ,i’m sure we could come to a suitable arrangement.

By: Nathan Mills

Nathan Mills — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:17:28 +0000

Off topic Nathan – but you might like to email our Defence spokespeople. Trevor

By: geek

geek — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:01:08 +0000

Wow what a stupid argument. No one is advocating no travel. What people do want is consideration.

I am more than happy to see politicians using tax dollars for genuine parliamentary business over sea’s. What annoys me is when I hear them trot out the line that they should have their partners travel paid for because it is too hard on a relationship to be separated. Sorry but financially those politicians are in a far better place to pay for that travel than military personal who deal with the same struggle on a larger scale. Many military personal sacrifice much to save the money to get their families out to meet them.

It is plain insulting when someone on an MP’s wages makes out that I should subsidize their relationship.

By: Adrian

Adrian — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:11:24 +0000

I’ve got an idea, why don’t we turn in to an old style Albania, nobody goes anywhere to do anything or find how others do things, or talk to anybody about anything, that way we can save a lot of money and really advance as a country.

By: geek

geek — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:56:47 +0000

I know its a bit late but to Paul. Would you be happy to pay for the wives and partners of our military personal to be flown out to visit them when they are deployed over seas. Our military personal deploy for longer stints than our MP’s, get paid far less to do so, and often do so in dangerous conditions. However you never see Trevor or any politician recognizing the value of their relationships.

Apparently our military personal are not only required to lay down their lives if called on, they must also lay down their families.

By: Trevor Mallard

Trevor Mallard — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:39:59 +0000

Thanks for all the comments above. David I suggest you read the post and comments following.

My former flatmates are not hoteliers. I might be a 56 year old male but I know how to use a washing machine and a dryer if necessary as I’m sure it will be in London.

The bookings were made tentatively about three months ago and and went firm about a month ago when I saw a special on the Air NZ website.

All costs other than the airfare subsidy will be put on my personal credit card. I don’t have any other type.

If you think I am going to report to you on where I eat, how much I drink and which buses I catch you can get stuffed. You have no legitimate interest in that.

As for the meetings. I will have pretty full days. About what most people work. Some of the interesting insights I will blog on. Some because the meetings are private I won’t.

As for the Phil comment. Easy. Phil delegates his overseas leave application approvals. As mine was unremarkable I presume Annie didn’t consult him.

By: DavidW

DavidW — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:46:22 +0000

Possibly the biggest mistake we “normal people” make when viewing this subject is to consider MPs as employees in an attempt to get some sort of comparisons that we can understand from our own experience. We now know that MPs do not see themselves as “employees” and remarkably few of them have experienced the disciplines of the private sector when it comes to following a set of clearly established procedures and accepting clearly imposed limitations.

This was best summed up by leader Phil who said that Trevor had advised him of the trip on Tuesday. How does that fit Trevor with your comment above that you must get your leader’s approval?

The treatment of the “company’s money” as a precious commodity is something that many are aware of. If these two statements can be reconciled, then one can only assume that this was a last minute trip and any frequent traveller knows that last minute trips and changes cost significantly more than trips where theer is time to assess travel options, carriers and connections.

This being the case Trevor, perhaps you would care to share the itinerary, flight details and costs of the plane and hotel bookings, and booking dates with the peasantry so that we can judge for ourselves just how insignificant the timing and travel choices you have made are.

And Trevor, you are not the only who has travelled extensively on business and been subject to intense scrutiny of every dollar spent in the process. One employer of my acquaintance insisted that the firm (one of New Zealand’s largest) would not pay for hotel laundry costs on any trip of under 2 weeks and kept the rule by insisting also that all costs were put on a personal credit card to be claimed back (or rejected for reimbursement) after the trip was over.