Skip to main content

MP Expenses

There is a fuss about expenses going on at the moment. This comes from the fact that historically allowances have been used to boost MP pay. This was obviously a mistake, but has been hidden until the current decade. Gradually it has become clearer and clearer that what is going on is indefensible.

My own view is that the rules of MP expenses should be determined by an independent body. The outcome of this would be properly justified.

The expenses for 2007/8 have just been released. It is important to distinguish between those figures which are for supporting the constituents and those figures which are for supporting the MP.

My own figures are:
Constituency and Research
Staffing: £82,588 (I have published a list of staff none of whom are relatives)
Office Costs: £29,031 (basically 1772 Coventry Road and postage costs)
Communications: £6,313 (annual report etc)
Personal costs
Additional Costs Allowance: £21,375
Travel by Car: £1,415
Travel by Rail: £1,737

I am one of few MPs who put additional money into staffing costs from my salary, but that is not reflected in the above figures.

My view is that when looking at expenses the concentration should be on minimising the cost to the public purse rather than having a complex paper trail.

I have done some calculations on the personal costs of MPs and I think I am still the most cost effective MP (in terms of personal costs) in Birmingham. Lynne Jones is the second most cost effective.


jacqui said…
This results in another problem. MPs then arguing over who spends less. Best way forward is to be strict. A salary and expenses, but expenses over a certain ammount, authorised in advance and covered, as would ALL expenses, by receipt.
With ref. to he story of "Rachel" in The Sunday Times today, I understand you are taking an interest on her behalf. I'm appalled at the way the official solicitor has dodged his responsibility to defend her. How can I as a member of he public, throw my weight behind Rachel's campaign to keep her daughter. I have no confidence in the social workers in Nottingham - the last one I knew had four children by four different fathers.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…