Expenses claim

MPs need to get real about the public outrage at second home expenses

The view of the public, and of Labour voters, is very straightforward: they fail to see any reason why Labour MPs would attempt to defend or vote to keep a discredited and outmoded expenses system.
 
To give specific examples: why does the taxpayer have to pay £23,000 a year for David Cameron to own a second home in Witney? Why is it possible for MPs to accumulate property using the second home allowance? Why can MPs move up the property chain by maximising their second home claim? How can an MP have a second home nearby their first home and claim second home expenses?
 
It is hardly surprising that some Tory MPs feel underpaid and impoverished as MPs. But Labour MPs? Why has the National Executive not called in every MP and peer to discuss their expenses and second jobs? As we all sign a declaration not to bring the party into disrepute, should Labour MPs not set higher standards than the Tory backwoodsmen?
 
We will all take a hit for unreceipted expenses and for any consumer goods we have bought, however much we attempt to defend their relevance. But why are we not taking a lead during this recession in tightening our belts by reducing this allowance to a much more acceptable and lower level?
 
I agree with Gordon Brown that staff should be directly employed and not classed as expenses. A rail season ticket would be similarly sensible. And I agree that expenses for attending parliament should be based on real attendance. Surely the second job MPs should claim from their second employer, not the taxpayer. But Gordon’s proposals need to be for overnight stays, as civil servants have and need to be for actual expenditure demonstrated by receipts.
 
Civil servants can claim around £127.50 for a 24-hour overnight stay in London, almost identical to the nightly rate at the County Hall Travel Lodge. This should be the maximum nightly claim, reducing the £24,000 threshold to around £15,000 maximum in the average parliamentary year of 120 overnights.

John Mann is MP for Bassetlaw

28 Apr 2009 12:06

 

Comments

• Posted by Dr D Ben Rees on 28 April 2009, 3:56:33 PM John Mann is on the ball.I cannot understand Jacqui SWmith and Labour ministers who are like the tories in their greed.Wherever I go that is the topic of conversation and unfortunately labour is getting all the stick because we forget david Cameron and Francis Maude and politicians like them.Gordon Brown has enough experience to know how we feel-frustrated,angry,determined to safeguard the Labour ethos.Bring back aneurin bevan o Comrades.
• Posted by Colin Challen MP on 28 April 2009, 4:04:45 PM John is right - why should Labour MPs experience the same level of comfort that Tory MPs expect - we should know our place! But surely he can suggest something cheaper than a Travel Lodge? Isn't there a Youth Hostel in London? He also seems to support the daft idea that MPs have no right to be in Westminster when Parliament is not actually sitting - unless at their own expense. The logic of that is neither should anybody else, so let's close the building down, or merely open it as a tourist attraction. Of course, MPs funding their own travel to meetings with Ministers in Whitehall during Recess periods is something Ministers would appreciate - there'd be fewer meetings! And with the internet, isn't the library a bit of a luxury too? It's a bit exclusive isn't it? Where does your puritanism stop, John?
• Posted by Dean Rogers on 28 April 2009, 5:10:28 PM John Mann is spot on. The reason we are getting the stick is the public don't really expect any different from the Tories and the Tory press is also spinning it as a crisis for Labour. Combined with the pious and smug tone we can take on issues it's no wonder people say, "I remember when you siad....." People would also find MP's asking for more money more credible if there weren't so many examples of MP's making ridiculous money for basically being an MP. How and when did Labour MP's start being paid to give speeches or write political columns in newspapers? Isn't that their basic job? It's embarrassing.
• Posted by FairnessFighter on 28 April 2009, 10:30:56 PM @ Colin Colin, last year you spent around £11k on your second home allowance, about £4k less than the rate John Mann is suggesting. If the rate was set in accordance with the cost of staying in a travel lodge (or other standard 3 star accommodation) which is acceptable to me and I reckon to most of the rest of us in the public - but didn't have to be spent on a travel lodge - would that be acceptable? If the rate was set out yearly, MPs would know more or less what their budget for the year was and could find somewhere appropriate - only for accommodation, and only with receipts. If MPs want to supplement that with their salary, I'm quite happy for them to do that. Fair deal?
• Posted by Pat Brennan on 29 April 2009, 9:29:39 AM I believe the 'worst' is yet to come, early in July and despite the redactions, when details of what has been claimed as 'expenses' are revealed and then exagerated by the Press. Absorbing ALL Allowances etc into a standard MP Salary (even if that doubles their current Salary), and cancel 'Constituency homes' allowances would satisfy most electors. Being an MP was once seen as something special, but now needs to be seen as just another well-paid job.
• Posted by John Mann MP on 29 April 2009, 7:07:16 PM

  Oh Colin Challen, what nonsense. As it happens I am staying in a youth hostel this weekend- good value at £20 a night, but I am fed up of Labour MPs justifying high expenses during the recession. If you claim your mortgage at £24,000 a year a la Cameron, then it has come down to £16,000 in 8 months. Stop pleading poverty and get real.

• Posted by Dan on 30 April 2009, 3:32:34 AM Well said John, this is bringing all politicians but especially Labour into contempt. If you need to be in London and a constituency far enough away that commuting is not reasonable then either you are paid a reasonable overnight expense, or we provide a 2nd home for the time that you need it, i.e. a taxpayer funded mortgage is an option but only if the 2nd property remains the property of the state, when you lose the seat you lose the 2nd home and you do not make a capital gain on it.
• Posted by Simon Stanley on 08 May 2009, 1:02:54 PM Blimey, Colin! you're very defensive. As a (quite senior) public servant myself I see no reason why MPs should not be subject to similar oversight - after all it's clear that so many of them are, or have been, abusing the system as to render it unviable and no longer trusted by the public - which is critical. Never forget that when you submit your expenses for payment it is the taxpayer who stumps up. I am often away overnight on public business and regularly sleep in perfectly comfortable (and sometimes very smart) hotels around the country for less than £127 a night. I am required to produce receipts for everything and if I were to abuse my expenses in the way we have heard about I would be summarily sacked - and quite rightly. Further, as a member of the Labour Party of 20 years standing, I am disgusted at the grubby, venal and downright dishonest behaviour being displayed by some Labour MPs. And while I don't expect my own MP to have had his snout in the trough in this way (I believe he's got more integrity) if his expenses DO reveal anything dishonest - and "it's all in accordance with the rules", Colin, doesn't mean it's not dishonest! - I can't see that I'll be voting at all come the next General Election. For God's sake, man, get real! I'm glad you're not my MP.
• Posted by Tim Gladman on 18 May 2009, 3:51:23 PM

  I agree with everything the Rt Hon John Mann and Simon Stanley say on this issue, and likewise cant understand Mr Challens flippancy. MPs are no diffrent to Civil Servants and shouldn't supliment their income in this way. Like any other job if the salary dosn't attract you dont apply! However from the outside the driver for this (other than greed and explotation of a wrotten system) is perhaps a salery which dosn't refelct the role most hardworking MPs do. If this is the case perhaps its time for an independant review to determine the right pay to comensurate with the expected duties. However whats the chance of that idea getting support in the current climate... slim? Well done John, is it 4 years now you have been putting all your expenses on your website?