MP - Allowances

#3
quote on sky...MPs think they are good value for money....Ha Ha Ha........now going off into the garden to scream obsenities to the great blue yonder............
 
#5
Their spending doesn't strike me as excessive really. Here are their guidelines which I've added some notes in red as my immediate reaction:

Column 1: Cost of staying away from main home

The Additional Costs Allowance (cost of staying away from main home/ ACA) is paid to reimburse Members for necessary costs incurred when staying overnight away from their main home for the purpose of performing parliamentary duties. Inner London Members do not receive this allowance.

2005/06 ACA maximum of £21,634

Column 2: London Supplement

Inner London Members receive the London Supplement instead of the ACA. Outer London Members may choose between the ACA and the London Supplement.

2005/06 London Supplement: £2,613

Column 3: Office running costs and Column 4: Staffing costs

These support Members in undertaking their parliamentary and constituency work. The Incidental Expenses Provision (IEP) can be used to meet the cost of: accommodation for office or surgery use; equipment and supplies for office or surgery; work commissioned or other services; and certain travel and communications. The Staffing Allowance is paid to enable Members to employ staff. Staff salaries are paid directly to staff by the House of Commons Department of Finance and Administration. The IEP can also be used to cover certain staff related costs. Budget flexibilities (see below) between allowances and between years mean that these two allowances should be considered together. [Seems to be saying staff salaries paid direct but still apportioned to MP's expense]

Members are permitted to transfer funds from the IEP to the Staffing Allowance. In addition, up to 10% of their Staffing Allowance can be transferred to the IEP provided they run a constituency office.

Members are also allowed to carry forward unused funds in the IEP and Staffing Allowance from one allowance year to the next or to draw down an advance from the next year’s budget. In both cases the Member’s allowance limit will be increased or decreased accordingly. The carry forward/draw down facility is only permitted for specific purposes and requires prior approval by the Department of Finance and Administration. [Carrying forward or back reduces the desire to spend up to the limit each year]

2005/06 IEP maximum of £20,000 [Not staggering...]
2005/06 Staffing Allowance maximum of £84,081 [Say, two to three graduates of varying experience]

Column 5: Members' travel

This column sets out the cost of travel on parliamentary business within the UK; certain European travel; and select committee travel to and from committee embarkation points (but not the cost of the visit itself). The Members’ travel column does not include travel on parliamentary delegation business. Certain elements of the travel allowances are taxable.

More information about the various categories of travel and transport is given below.

Public Transport
Subject to certain rules, Members may claim the full cost of expenditure for relevant travel by public transport. [Certain rules I hope should say that lowest priced fares only etc]

Motor Mileage Allowance
2005/06 mileage rate: first 10,000 miles per year at the rate of 40p per mile, and over 10,000 at 25p per mile [Standard]

Bicycle Allowance
2005/06 mileage rate: 20p per mile

Motorcycle Allowance
2005/06 mileage rate: 24p per mile

European Travel
Travel and subsistence costs for up to 3 visits per year to EU institutions, EU agencies, the national parliaments of EU member states, European Free Trade Association states, or candidate countries.

Column 6: Members' staff travel

Each Member is entitled to claim costs of up to a total of 12 return journeys for staff per calendar year between Westminster and the constituency. [Fairly tight]

Column 7: Centrally purchased stationery

This column sets out the cost of stationery items ordered from a central supplier for use in direct connection with a Member’s parliamentary duties. [Needs a firm cap on this as some are overspending me thinks...]

Column 7a: Postage associated with the use of centrally purchased stationery

This column sets out the cost of postage associated with the use of stationery with pre-paid postage ordered from the central supplier for use in direct connection with a Member’s parliamentary duties.

Column 8: Centrally provided computer equipment

This column sets out the cost of equipment supplied on loan to each Member. The provision allows for up to one laptop, four desktop PCs and two printers. The figures show the asset value spread over a four-year period. [Some modest spending really...]

Column 9: Other costs

This column sets out costs incurred from central budgets, including:

a temporary secretarial allowance for additional help when Members’ staff are absent due to sickness or maternity leave;

additional security costs for the office up to a maximum entitlement of £1,500;

exceptional needs support which provides for short term additional help to Members whose constituencies have particular problems;

a winding-up allowance (WUA) payable to defeated or retiring Members or representatives of deceased Members after the date on which they cease to be Members of Parliament. This covers the reimbursement of the cost of any work necessary, including staff and office costs, to conclude their parliamentary business after the date on which they cease to be Members of Parliament. The maximum that a former Member could claim from this allowance in 2005/06 was £39,694. [Glad handing as this is a stonking figure but then I suppose redundancy doesn't feature for MPs or does it?]

Further information

Links to expenditure tables for other budget periods, information relating to House of Lords Members' Allowances, and further related links are available on the Members' Allowances for both Houses page.
 
#6
BoomShackerLacker said:
Their spending doesn't strike me as excessive really. Here are their guidelines which I've added some notes in red as my immediate reaction:
What about dear old Gerry Adams & Martin McGuiness? As far as I'm aware, they don't set foot in Parliament yet they managed to run up nearly quarter of a million in expenses last year. That's in addition to their MP's salaries. They also draw over £171,000 in wages in expenses from the non-functioning Northern Ireland assembly. Over half a million quid from the public purse for doing feck all. Nice work if you can get it.

Or indeed David Blunkett who managed to claim £75,363 in mortgage expenses despite only having a £10,000 mortgage. LINK

I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I hear certain MPs complaining about 'fat cat bosses'.
 
#7
Ancient_Mariner said:
BoomShackerLacker said:
Their spending doesn't strike me as excessive really. Here are their guidelines which I've added some notes in red as my immediate reaction:
What about dear old Gerry Adams & Martin McGuiness? As far as I'm aware, they don't set foot in Parliament yet they managed to run up nearly quarter of a million in expenses last year. That's in addition to their MP's salaries. They also draw over £171,000 in wages in expenses from the non-functioning Northern Ireland assembly. Over half a million quid from the public purse for doing feck all. Nice work if you can get it.

Or indeed David Blunkett who managed to claim £75,363 in mortgage expenses despite only having a £10,000 mortgage. LINK

I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I hear certain MPs complaining about 'fat cat bosses'.
Fair comment and there's always those who go off the scale and need gripping. I scanned down the list and thought the vast majority were within reasonable limits. Since they're 7% above last year I'd cap or reduce their allocation this year so their two year average equals inflation. I would be peed off if they don't have to submit chits for every expense.

Their constituency should be aware of their value-for-money in terms of activity. And their whips hopefully monitor their activity closely. I'm not a great fan of other draconian measures.
 
#9
BoomShackerLacker said:
I would be peed off if they don't have to submit chits for every expense.
I think that's a speciality of the European Parliament, who are in a different league when it comes to expenses.

IIRC there was a scandal last year when some of the MEPs got caught. Standard practice was to claim a full fair BA business class flight for every trip to Brussels then fly in on Ryanair. Some of them were trousering well over £1,000 a week on that little scam. It wasn't even illegal.
 
#10
Ancient_Mariner said:
BoomShackerLacker said:
I would be peed off if they don't have to submit chits for every expense.
I think that's a speciality of the European Parliament, who are in a different league when it comes to expenses.

IIRC there was a scandal last year when some of the MEPs got caught. Standard practice was to claim a full fair BA business class flight for every trip to Brussels then fly in on Ryanair. Some of them were trousering well over £1,000 a week on that little scam. It wasn't even illegal.
Just been round Tescos and managed to read today's Guardian report in between being daylight-robbed by the price of British beef (£20 for a kilo of fillet for tomorrow's Beef Wellington!).

They highlighted that MPs don't submit chits below £250 claims and their spending isn't published. It is a matter of trust surely, that this country's members of parliament can spend wisely, but it was pointed out also that the Scottish MP's expense claims dramatically reduced when their accounts went public.

If your the CEO or tea lady, you should be required to submit a chit for every expense. That's no hardship. I'm not sure every expense should be published though as trust has to enter in somewhere.

V. nice to see the Guardian's inch high banner headline say MP's staff expenses "£48bn" instead of million. Wince.
 
#12
MP's demand chazzer's tax returns..when will thye release their tax returns??


MP's suck,or blow.but never repay the vlaue...
 
#13
#14
Having looked at the Lord's expenses youcan see why The Labour Party are determined to democratise the upper house in order to corrupt them and save the embarrassment of the Lords being in the house as often as the Commons for a fraction of the cost.
 

Similar threads

Top