The first nigglings of public discomfort with the spending of New Zealand MPs can be traced back to 1997, when MP Jonathan Hunt was revealed to have clocked up a $29,000 taxi bill.
Hunt had already been dubbed the Minister of Wine and Cheese, because of his large girth and
his regular appearance at openings and cocktail functions. After Labour became the Government in 1999, he was elected Speaker - and thus became the host of almost every function in the parliamentary precinct.
Former New Zealand First MP Tukoroirangi Morgan also raised a storm when the scale of his expenses claims as a director of Aotearoa Television were revealed, including a pair of $89 silk boxer shorts. But his claims were against the publicly funded television channel, not against Parliament.
It was the 2001 investigation into the accommodation claims of the Labour Government's Marian Hobbs and Phillida Bunkle that really pushed public tolerance to breaking point.
Hobbs, a Labour minister, claimed her primary residence was in Christchurch - despite being the MP for Wellington Central - and claimed an allowance.
Bunkle, an Alliance minister, claimed her primary residence was a house in Waikanae, though she already owned a house in Thorndon. So she claimed an out-of-town living allowance, worth up to $15,000 a year.
Both were stood down as ministers, pending an investigation. The two MPs were later cleared of wrongdoing, but the damage was done. Hobbs was reinstated to the Cabinet; Bunkle never was.
Kiwiblog's David Farrar this week acknowledged MPs' legal entitlement to claim up to $24,000 in Wellington accommodation expenses, but questioned the moral propriety of the way some did it.
In particular, he objected to the practice of MPs using their parliamentary superannuation scheme to buy a house, then renting it back to themselves - allowing themselves to claim $24,000 when their mortgage interest payments would amount to far less. "It's a conflict of interest, you're effectively landlord and tenant," Farrar says.
