Leading article: Fewer drinks on the House, please
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.It's reassuring to learn from Chris Bryant's description in today's Independent that MPs have generally moderated their on-site drinking, thanks in part to the televising of Parliament and the expenses scandal.
The days of boozy lunches are gone, and the bars – with occasional lapses, as we discovered this week – are genteel salons of cross-party fraternisation. Even if MPs have changed their habits to this extent, though, the question remains: should Parliament really accommodate bars and restaurants – at least as many as it does – with food and drink subsidised by the taxpayer?
By all means, enjoy the terraces for leisure and entertaining constituents. But when MPs and peers are in the precincts of Parliament, they are at work. This must be one of the last workplaces in the country where alcohol is still served, discounted at that. Long hours and the diktat of the division bell are arguments for providing good in-house catering. But the range of cheap eating and drinking keeps MPs within their four walls and stunts the growth of services in the vicinity. Less choice and less subsidy in Parliament would encourage MPs to get out more and pay what the real world pays – which would be good for them, and good for us.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments