RUTH Davidson has refused to say whether she will take her full daily allowance from the House of Lords.
On Monday, peers begged for a "hardship fund" after daily allowance was cut to £162 due to the pandemic.
Unelected members had their tax-free payment reduced from £323 when the crisis hit, with only those who “actively participated” in debates eligible.
READ MORE: Peers begged for 'hardship fund' after daily allowance was cut to £162
In emails released through a Freedom of Information request by the SNP, lords complain that they’re struggling to keep up with payments on their second homes, with others threatening to resign because “the financial pinch is so horrible”.
Despite the coronavirus crisis coinciding with skyrocketing food insecurity among the UK’s poorest people, one peer complained the new rules are taking food out of their mouths, with members coining the phrase: “if you don't speak you don't eat”.
Davidson was given the peerage from Boris Johnson this summer and her first FMQs performance saw her defend her decision to take the job-for-life.
The National asked the Scottish Tories if Davidson would be taking her full daily allowance and expenses when she takes up her role and whether she agrees that members abuse the allowance system.
But the party refused to answer, saying: "Ruth Davidson is a Member of the Scottish Parliament and the leader of the Scottish Conservative group at Holyrood. She does not hold any other titles."
They also refused to say whether Davidson thinks those in the House of Lords should be paid more.
READ MORE: 'Furious' Ruth Davidson orders the BBC to stop calling her 'Baroness'
The SNP condemned the Lords comments as insensitive and indicative of a broken system.
MSP Rona Mackay said: “These documents expose the total privilege and sheer arrogance of unelected Lords at Westminster.
“How dare these peers complain they aren’t paid enough when thousands of people are struggling just to make ends meet due to the financial impact of coronavirus.
“These Lords are out of control – only Communist China has a bigger legislative body – and even more members of the privileged elite, like Baroness Ruth Davidson, will be skipping down the road to join them very shortly.
“It’s time to put the brakes on this gravy train and abolish the House of Lords for good.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel