More concerns about possible POV issue 

Is it me or is a substantial amount of this article simply a series of criticisms of Ms Nash, presumably by a constituent with unrealistic expectations? There is an awful lot of emphasis on her expenses, which seem rather average to me and although I can appreciate there are grievances about her performance, it does not seem unusual for a new backbencher to speak little in parliament when they have not even been an MP for a year. I'm not going to charge in and remove all of this information as I don't have much context about her but I am concerned about the general quality and neutrality of the material in this article. Thanks,