She's along for the ride says Rodney

UNDER FIRE MP Rodney Hide, caught taking advantage of a perk he has campaigned to get rid of, has vowed to continue taking his girlfriend on overseas trips at taxpayers' expense.

The former perkbuster has been under pressure since it was revealed on Thursday that he took girlfriend Louise Crome on a super city fact-finding trip to London and the US.

Hide insists the 90% discount on international travel that MPs who entered parliament pre-1999 receive for their partners is wrong, but says it is the system he has been forced to work with. He said he would not pay back the cost of Crome's trip.

Hide told the Sunday Star-Times yesterday he felt like a fool because senior MPs had warned him that disclosing expenses, which he has pushed for, would be taken out of context by the media, and MPs would be given little opportunity to explain themselves.

He said media reports about the cost of the London-US trip were inaccurate, and he claims taking Crome did not cost taxpayers $25,163. He said this figure amounted to total air travel, mostly domestic, for the three months to September. The true cost of taking her to London and the US was closer to $5000, he said.

Hide said he had copped verbal abuse in the street since the story broke, which he did not mind, but was disappointed that his parents, his girlfriend and her parents had been harassed by journalists when they had done nothing wrong.

Hide said he still wanted to remove the 90% subsidy MPs received for their wives and girlfriends to travel overseas – something he has been pushing for 12 years – but until that happened he would continue to take advantage of the system.

He said that in a perverse way, being caught out using a perk he disagreed with was a case of "I told you so".

When asked if he would pay back the money Hide said: "No. I've opposed perks, I've largely cleaned up the perks. This perk is wrong, I've never agreed with it. Look, you try to hold a new relationship together. You are very busy as a minister. I hardly see the young lady and it's pretty tough. I had the opportunity for this trip and I wanted to do it because I didn't want to make a mistake with the Auckland [super city proposal]."

But why take advantage of a perk he says should be abolished?

"I think the system is wrong because I think MPs should just be paid cleanly and then claim expenses. Because we have this allowance, MPs' salaries are deducted accordingly. So then the choice you have is two-fold. One, do you not take your partner? To be honest, I spend precious little time with her as it is. The second thing is to pay it yourself, and then you are being a martyr because essentially you are paying twice because my salary is deducted for this allowance. I thought hard about it and I was prepared to justify the overall spending.

"I'd change the system in a heartbeat. I've been pushing it for 12 bloody years but I'm caught up in it."

He would continue to be accountable to the public and face the media on the issue but said it was inappropriate to involve his family or his girlfriend and her family.

"It's not their decision, it's my responsibility and it just puts a big strain on everything. You feel bad about upsetting your family members. My poor mother is beside herself."

When it was revealed this year that MPs and ministers were taking partners overseas at taxpayers expense, Prime Minister John Key told ministers that, when the government was asking taxpayers to tighten belts, spouses should pay their own way .