Amongst today’s headlines including the continuing BP oil spill fiasco, the changes to the Bank of England by Chancellor Osborne, further Bloody Sunday Inquiry reaction and the vindication of the Shannon Matthews social workers I discovered this interesting piece in the Telegraph. The title caught my eye: “Expenses: MPs being ‘thrown to the dogs’”.
For anyone who isn’t aware, there was a big scandal last year involving the expenses MPs are entitled to in the performance of their duties. MPs are allowed what are known as ‘second home allowances’ if their constituency is not in London or within commuting distance of Westminster. In other words, if you are an MP from Manchester you are entitled to expenses incurred while maintaining a second home in London or nearer to Westminster that you reside in when Parliament is in session. Clearly one cannot commute from Manchester every day.
The public would expect an MP to live comfortably. Some MPs, on the other hand, felt the need to live more extravagantly, which included buying £1,200 televisions, leather furniture, cameras, gardening services or on the other end of the scale, being so petty as to claim a measly £1.50 for a bottle of cleaner and £2.99 for a stainless steel dog bowl. There were also issues with ‘flipping’ where MPs would change the classification of their second home to their main home thus their main home would become their second home and they could claim expenses for it instead. This ranged from removal of dry rot to probably the two worst offences of all: moat cleaning and a duck island. That’s right, an MP flipped his constituency home, classifying it as his second home, and claimed money from the taxpayer for a duck island. It’s a floating house in the middle of a pond…for ducks and it cost £1,600. Basically, many MPs were caught with their hands in the cookie jar of public taxpayer money simply because the ‘system was broken’. Most said they had done nothing wrong; it was the corrupt system that allowed them to claim for these items. They were only following the rules, they said. The public didn’t really buy it.
Now we have the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) operating a new allowances system and MPs are crying foul. They are claiming that it is too bureaucratic and it is breaching parliamentary privilege by preventing them from carrying out their duties. Funnily enough, I don’t really have any sympathy for them. Two points stand out for me in this article. Number one is this gem from Bob Russell:
“Mr Russell said that it was unacceptable that he had been forced to open a new bank account from which to pay his staff, because he did not want to have to use the account he shared with his wife.”
I beg your pardon? I think that most businessmen in the country have one bank account which they use to pay staff and conduct business and another private account for personal, family matters. In my opinion, this statement smacks of “let them eat cake”. Why wouldn’t you have a bank account from which you pay staff separate from that of your personal account? I just don’t know what else to say about this.
The second point comes from Mrs Ann Clwyd. She says that she would possibly have not bothered to stand for re-election had she known what a “hassle” it would be to claim allowances. Well, Mrs Clwyd, I’m sure your constituents in Cynon Valley, Wales will happily accept your resignation now if the “hassle” is just too much for you. I believe the phrase “put your money where your mouth is” might be appropriate here.
MPs are accused of being exceedingly rude to the poor civil servants tasked with assessing claims under the new system. The article says that:
“Nigel Gooding resigned as interim operations director of IPSA after just three months, saying that his “health and sanity” were being damaged by confrontations with angry MPs.”
Ridiculous, utterly ridiculous. No one likes change but it would seem some MPs still have yet to grasp reality. Duck ponds, moats, claiming interest on mortgages that are paid up, claiming rent for flats owned by relatives or claiming for toothpaste and soap are not vitally important to your job as an MP. Stop complaining about the new system and get on with your job. Your constituents will thank you.
For more information on outrageous claims, see the Telegraph.