| Comment | Don't really want to defend this, but i do want to at least make this comment, because i believe this is more than a little suspect.
This discretionary quite literally replaced something called the "clothing allowance", so why is it suddenly strange that the Lord Provost, someone who's meant to represent the city in a manner befitting a Lord Provost (looking professional for the most part).
Obviously among the cuts to services (in no small part because of Labour's insistence on fighting women on pay for years...), this looks bad, but it's literally meant for this reason? She also hasn't maxed it out either by the looks of things, £8000 over 28 months is about £3000-4000 less than what she could have spent.
This honestly seems like a really poor smear frankly, like the car last time when it was literally a gift that anyone would have accepted. Surely a FOI request should go out to the Lord Provosts to see how much they spent of the clothing allowance to see if this is a legitimate critique? |
|---|