Am I reading the report on Assembly Members’ Allowances correctly? Does it really say that AM’s “are expected to travel by the most cost-effective means”?
Do I read that right: does it mean that they should travel second class when travelling by train?
Because if it does then I’m not happy.
I want my AMs to be able to work on trains and you can’t in my experience do that in second class. The seats are too narrow and there’s no room for a laptop. So the journey time is wasted.
Whilst on the surface it appears that this idea of second class travel is a good “levelling” policy, it does not recognise the opportunity cost.
It is therefore the wrong decision and should be rejected.