Today, we submitted our evidence to the Committee on Standards in Public Life's investigation into MPs' expenses. The inquiry is pretty wide-ranging, with a number of questions to be answered on a wide variety of topics, so it's enabled us to set out a pretty comprehensive manifesto for how best to reform the system.
Here is the summary section of the submission:
-
- Reform of the House of Commons expenses system must be comprehensive. Public anger
demands reforms which will not only lower the overall cost, but which will also remove any
potential for frivolous, sometimes even fraudulent claims. Crucially, as well as financial
considerations all reforms must consider the paramount need to restore the public’s faith in
Parliament.
- Reform of the House of Commons expenses system must be comprehensive. Public anger
-
- The system must be based on expenses – i.e. the reimbursement only of actual outgoings
essential to Parliamentary work – rather than allowances. The term allowance suggests the
handing over of a sum of money regardless of the actual cost incurred, which is unacceptable.
All expenses must be demonstrably necessary to the carrying out of Parliamentary duties; they
must not in any way be able to finance ‘lifestyle’ choices.
- The system must be based on expenses – i.e. the reimbursement only of actual outgoings
-
- There must be no opportunity for financial gain through expenses. For instance MPs should not
be able to make capital gain on properties they obtain with assistance from the taxpayer; in the
future accommodation expenses must be restricted to rent or the upkeep of taxpayer owned
homes. From our own research we have identified the Olympic Village as an ideal place for
housing MPs.
- There must be no opportunity for financial gain through expenses. For instance MPs should not
-
- All claims must be backed up with proper receipts; no expenses should be reimbursed unless a
valid receipt or invoice can be produced, regardless of how small the sum might be. All legal
statutes governing the use of expenses must be fully applicable to MPs. Similarly, MPs must be
subject to the same taxes as everyone else; MPs must be subject to the rules which they
impose.
- All claims must be backed up with proper receipts; no expenses should be reimbursed unless a
-
- Transparency must be at the heart of any future system, not just to ensure that MPs abide by
the rules in future, but also to allay the concerns of the public. A high degree of openness may
feel intrusive to MPs, but it is essential if Parliament is ever to regain the trust of the people.
- Transparency must be at the heart of any future system, not just to ensure that MPs abide by
-
- Transparency must apply to all claims – whether approved or not – and will show complete
detail. Only specific bank account details should be withheld from the public.
- Transparency must apply to all claims – whether approved or not – and will show complete
-
- Nor should such information have to be hunted out through freedom of information requests; all
expenses information should be accessible at all times to the public, via the internet and
through constituency offices.
- Nor should such information have to be hunted out through freedom of information requests; all
-
- Reform of the expenses system must not entail a rise in MPs’ pay. On all counts – except the
bogus comparisons of the SSRB – MPs are very well paid, and certainly paid appropriately to the
demanding job they carry out. Moreover, the public will not tolerate a rise in basic pay to
compensate MPs for a loss of expenses; not only would this reward MPs for abusing the
expense system up till now, but MPs are already paid significantly more than their average
constituent.
- Reform of the expenses system must not entail a rise in MPs’ pay. On all counts – except the
The full document is here. We have also applied to give oral evidence to the inquiry, so expect more sparks to fly!