Tonight:
5°c
Revealed: the peers who claim the most expenses
Sri Carmichael, Consumer Affairs Reporter30 Jan 2009
A SERIES of peers claimed hundreds of pounds each day in expenses without asking ministers any questions and rarely participating in the chamber of the House of Lords.
A "value for money" index compiled by the Evening Standard from the latest list of members' expenses reveals which Lords charged taxpayers up to £300 a day "subsistence" despite rarely speaking in the chamber.
The list includes former BBC director general Lord Birt, a crossbencher, who is the highest claiming peer. He claimed on average £296.38 in overnight and day subsistence for each of the 72 days he attended the House between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2008.
During that year he did not table a single question, spoke in three debates and voted in five per cent of divisions.
There is growing concern over the make-up and role of the House of Lords following allegations that four peers offered to change the law in exchange for cash. Scotland Yard is considering whether the allegations warrant a criminal investigation.
Two of them, Lord Moonie and Lord Snape, who have denied any wrongdoing, feature in the top 30 highest charging peers. Other peers high up the list of expenses claims include former Labour party economic adviser Lord Eatwell, who is president of Queens' College, Cambridge. He tabled no questions, spoke in 10 debates and voted in 18 per cent of divisions last year.
Lord Birt, Lord Eatwell and another crossbencher in the top five highest charging peers, Lord Oxburgh, are all paid for consultancy work outside Parliament. Six former MPs - three Liberal Democrat, two Conservative and one Labour - feature in the top 30 index.
Also included are the Conservatives' shadow lord chancellor Lord Kingsland, the Liberal Democrats' president Baroness Scott and Lord Razzall, the party's business spokesman.
He shares a London home with his partner Baroness Bonham-Carter and they both take full advantage of the living expenses on offer. Their main residence is in Wiltshire.
Trade unionist Lord Burlison, who died last May, topped the index. He was instrumental in starting Tony Blair and Lord Mandelson's political careers, helping to select them as MPs.
The list also details 39 peers who chose not to ask for any money.
Peers can claim up to £165.50 overnight accommodation expenses for each day they attend the House if they register their main home outside Greater London. A member needs to enter the chamber or a committee and be ticked off by a clerk to qualify for this payment, but it does not matter how long they stay or whether they participate.
Peers can push their total overnight subsistence claim higher if they have a second home in London as a parliamentary base. Then they are entitled to up to £110.50 maintenance costs for each night they spend away from London on select committee business. Peers do not incur any expenses on such trips as they are all paid by the select committee.
A day-to-day allowance of up to £82.50 is also available to cover meals and "incidental" travel. The Standard did not include office costs or travel costs in the value for money index. The latter varies according to the location of the member's main residence. All peers are entitled to first-class train tickets and business-class flights as well as generous car mileage. No receipts are required to claim allowances.
Several of the peers in the table live within striking distance of London by car or train, but can claim travel if they live outside Greater London.
Mark Wallace, campaign director of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: "It's unacceptable that some peers are getting away with claiming huge amounts of taxpayers' money and then doing little or no work in return."
The House of Lords information office said the Lords cost less than a third of what it costs to run the House of Commons per member. Last year each peer cost the taxpayer £168,000 and each MP cost £599,000. None of the peers was available for comment today.
Reader views (60)
now its the peers turn to be ambarressed by letting the ordinary people see what they are claiming in expenses, no doubt it will be just like the MPS saying they are doing nothing wrong its all what they are allowed, all i can say is its about time normal people started to be allowed to run this country who live in the really world having to work for a living on what theses MPS say is a decent wage, at least these people pay there own way in life,
- Dawn O'Brien, congleton cheshire uk, 29/10/2009 15:54
Report abuse
is this why we pay taxes? and why are those guilty of fraudulent or profiteering expenses not prosecuted? Joe public would be!
- Ernest Cotton, burton-on-trent staffs, 29/10/2009 15:54
Report abuse
If an electrician has to travel 200 miles to do a job and stay over night,he does it.
He cannot, however claim expenses to do the job. So if you wish to be a Lord or a MP for that matter and your job is in London and you live elsewhere, thats your choice, it should not be for the tax payer to subsidise your traveling and accomodation, or second home expenses.
- Barbus, Liverpool, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
..I refer to Gilbert & Sullivan's opera Iolanthe. There you will find all the information on the HoL you'll need. When W S Gilbert wrote this in the 19th century, it led to howls of outrage from the HoL. It would be great timing for this to return to the London stage - it would cheer everyone up and show the HoL up for what it is - a gravy train for elderly politicians with nothing else to do and do it very well.
- Joannie, London, England, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
It's stinking- (sinking?) Britain! Nothing else to say.
- Alan, Chigwell. UK, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
How many of these are in the "Old Boys Club"? (Freemasons are not required to declare their membership) They tend to serve each others interests first.
- Frank, Bristol, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
What self serving scum we now seem to have in the House of Lords!!
- Doff, filey uk, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Nu Labor go away!
- Jacqueline, Hampstead, London, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
The Lords provide a valueble backstop against kneejerk and often undemocratic laws New Labour have tried to rush through parliment in recent years. Expenses are abused on both sides of the house as we know and should be cleaned up, but I would be very worried if the Lords were not able to challenge parliament.
- Steve, Hereford, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Its always been the same but as per nothing will be done about it, certainly agree with Flys comment.
- Mike, London England, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
I don’t want to defend an institution that is an anachronism – and the thrust of the article is something to be welcomed and largely correct - but I’ve been doing a bit of checking and anybody with even a basic knowledge of how to search Hansard – Parliament’s record of debates, questions, statements etc – would soon find that some of the stats quoted here are completely wrong.
- Ian, London, UK, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
The whole antiquated system should end .It is an insult to all British citizens ..shame on them .Send 'em all to the Tower .
- Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells, Edison usa, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Less than a Tenner gets one comfortably out of the top 20 and nicely in no man's land. Not a lot of difference between them. Still, nice to see that 67% of the top 3 are labour. Aren't statistics wonderful. Given that the world is going to hell in a hand basket, doesn'r Sri Carmichael have something better to research? Interestingly that is my surname too!
- Coylum, Vancouver, Canada, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Baroness Bonham-Carter should spend some of that hard earned money down the dentist.
- alf, Bollox, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
I echo the words of Alf Bennett, and would like to know when the Government is going to get rid of these overpaid
mostly lazy members of an elite club that is mainly
inherited, and that the country certainly don't want or
need? Get rid of them!
- Allan Wilkins, Gravesend, Kent., 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
they also have a five star restaurant and are only charged pennies for the meals they order,,,,,,,
- Stan Shaw, DeLand Florida USA, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Unelected, unaccountable, good value for money? Hmmm... Don't think so sunshine.
- Frank, Home Counties, England., 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
For some reason these lazy good for nothing spongers see this as their divine right, they have no shame and couldn't care less about pensioners, or anyone else, demonstrating. If they did care they wouldn't behave the way they do. I personally know one elderly peer who is amazingly adept at scrounging as much for free as he possibly can - and he is absolutely loaded. It makes me sick!
- Kathy, london, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
the scum always floats to the surface and right now there is a lot on scum on the pint better known as the UK.
- Fly, london, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
The latest revelations clearly indicate an immediate need to abolish the house of lords and halt this gravy train in it's tracks. The upper house should consist of elected (honest) members who are accountable to the tax payer. This might help to restore the confidence of the electorate. The current government is seen for what it is - corrupt and dishonest. If found guilty of corruption then the four lords must be severely punished. Justice must not just be done - it must be seen to be done.
- R.F., Yorks, UK, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
It may be better for their Lordships to be charged a daily attendance fee, in place of the present allowance and expenses they receive. This could sort out those who really wish to provide public service from those intent on milking the system.
- Duyfken, UK, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
I thought Labour was going to abolish the Lords; instead they seem to be taking every advantage of the gravy train. The sooner we have an elected upper chamber the better.
- John, London, UK, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Why did you not point out that 8 of the highest claimants were Conservatives, 9 were Labour, and 8 were Liberal Democrats. Not much to choose between any of them. The real difference between Conservative peers and peers from the other parties is that only the Conservatives have an ex-convict (Lord Archer), and a serving prisoner (Lord Black) in the House of Lords.
- Val Daniels, Mijas Costa, Spain, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
There has to be mobilisation against the MPs and these unelected peers who continue to grab as much as they can from the people of the UK. Time and time again we hear about incredible acts of gluttony as these people rob from the UK tax payer. When so many people in the UK are struggling to feed themselves and are being evicted, these privileged few are continuing to live a hedonistic lifestyle funded by the UK taxpayer.
I am so angry. This needs to stop. Now.
- The People, London, UK., 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Do we really need all these peers - they are clearly all on the gravy train and don't appear to be value for money. We have approximately 700 - SEVEN HUNDRED - Lords - it seems outrageous when we have a total population of 60 odd million compared with the approximately 300 million in the American population and they manage with 100 senators in their upper house!
- Barbara, Walton-on-Thames, England, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
It would certainly not embarrass the gilded socks off the Lords if pensioners demonstrated. They have no shame.
- Peter Little, Wendover, England, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
The country is in deep recession,we are all tightening our belts and these people are claiming every penny from our taxes they can get.We are encouraged to use energy saving lamps,turn the heating down and other ecconomical means while these "lords" are encouraged to behave in this despicable manner.I can sleep at night with a clear conscience can they?
- Gerald Diamond, Romford Essex, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
will these expenses be subject to the detailed analysis we saw in the house of commons expenses. we need to know more as to how our tax is being spent!!!! we need the help of a certain newspaper
- K, sussex, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
GOOD POINT...
Val Daniels, Mijas Costa, Spain
And...
WELL SAID...
Fly, london
- Mark H, London England, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
What is your exact methodology and sources in determining this list? I am not 100% sure that these figures stand up to scrutiny.
- Mike, New Zealand, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Why do we even have a House of Lords?
- Frederick, London, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
The other point to make is that these payments are described as "expenses" and hence tax free!!!! I doubt if the Inland Revenue would allow this to happen anywhere else.
- jeremy E, London, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Have never been able to understand why these public figures are not re-imbursed any entitled expenses at cost and against receipts. And why on earth are they paid meal allowances - as far as Iam concerned they should take their packing up along with them to the Upper Chamber if they do not want to lash out in the available restuaurants. They are living the life of Riley.
- robert El-Cid,, Hull, East Yorks.,, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
So the best-value Lord is a Hereditary Peer.
Looking down the list I see that Baroness Smith of Gilmorehill - whose qualifications for sitting in the Upper House were (a) being the widow of former Labour Party Leader John Smith and (b) a minor champion of Scottish Arts - claimed £60,000 for tabling no questions, speaking in no debates and only even bothering to vote 22% of the time.
Lets see a parallel list of the attendence rates under the old peerage system: it would be interesting to see how they compare. Also, more details about WHO the HECK these people are . . . ?!
- Roz, Chamonix, France - if it really matters!, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Can R.F. and all the other people suggesting an elected Lords explain why they think that would be any better? Haven't we had a constant stream of sleeze stories from Parliament as well? I'm sure that if we broke down the list of highest claiming peers that the non-hereditary, government appointed ones would be the majority so surely the pproblem has been exacerbated by appointees. At least the Lords do not get a salary as well.
- Mark, London, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
And that's not even including all the 'extras.' Lord Taylor of Blackburn has been a Lord for 30 years! A good ten year span after serious thoughts were being had about misbehaving lords. And he has been awarded an OBE and an MBE. After 20 years as a local councillor. Now he gets £330 per day attendance, has apparently enjoyed £400,000 in expenses and picks up £120,000 consultancy fees at the drop of an eyelid- plus other remuneration one may suppose. Smart fellow and clearly brighter than I am, suffering from tobacco withdrawal symptoms as I struggle on, looking in despair at my old age pension of £90 per week. Yes, that's £90 per week. The lowest in Europe. Our leaders need to do something about the fabric of our British society, before all we Old Age Pensioners take to the streets and invade Parliament Square, embarrassing the gilded socks off them, waving huge banners saying 'Bring in the UN.' And we've got a list of those who'll be first in the tumbril. Oh yes.
- John Problem, Hackney Wick, London, UK, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
This is all part of the REALLY BIG BOYS (and girls) CLUB, isn't it? All in the pig swill together stuffing their gobs with cash. What a disgrace. And we lowly taxpayers are supposed to just take this lying down while our lives are being ruined by the bankers and politicians.
- Alf Bennett, London, England., 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
These are all parasites who don't give a damn to the working classes in hardship !
- Joe, Swanley Kent, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
The House of Lords currently quite happily accommodates both a convicted arsonist, Lord Watson, and that bumptious perjurer, Lord Archer.
Once you manage to get your snout in that particular Westminster trough, if your a Freemason, you're in it for life.
- Frank, Bristol UK, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Which begs the question... why were they appointed in the first place? Reform can no longer be put on hold.
- Dhanraj, Basildon Essex, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
I used to be in favour of a 2nd house, as a safety valve to crazy decisions made in Parliament. Although the money involved per member is not that great, it still looks like a great wheeze and the cheapest alternative to an old peoples home in the country and from the ga-ga comments from many of its members and the fact an already pensioned old MP, they can still draw a few hundred quid, from just turning up each day. This is an insult and travesty to millions of ordinary pensioners. Get rid of them all, unless they want to serve the people and turn up for nix.
- Bondy, london, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Expenses should be paid to reimburse money paid out. It is a farcical situation that MPs and Lords can claim a daily allowance and not even have to turn up to do a day's work.
The French wouldn't stand for it.
- Nobby Clark, Perth, the Scottish one, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
It is peculiar how some of these lightweights have so many expenses yet ask hardly any questions and appear in the Lords so rarely.
Maybe certain expenses ought to be investigate more closely eg secretarial help and I don't mean family members. Let them be identified; I am sure wives would like to know.
- Michael Waugh, Kensington, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
What are you doing to this country.?
- David,Chertsey, Chertsey.UK., 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others, (with apologies to George Orwell)
- John W, hamilton canada, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Whilst on balance, most of the criticism of the Upper House is well deserved, we do need a regulator for the megalomaniac Bills that the House of Commons try to pass into law!
So, O.K, they (House of Lords) may be/are a thieving conniving self serving bunch of miscreants, but, that could be held in check by a set of rules that are amended from time to time to close the various loopholes that they would try to develop!
The rub is, who or whom is going to monitor this bunch of crooks?
There lies ye rub!
GERONIMO
- GERONIMO, LONDON MIDDLESEX, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
There is no difference between a hereditary peer and the new Labour lot. You only have to look at them in action to note their contemptious and superior attitude. Titles and the Lords in particular have shown themselves to be vulgar parasites with little or no integrity. They expect the public to believe that they did not know you had to declare you interests? Sack these vulgar bufoons and get rid of the whole thing.
- Val Keller, London UK, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Who the hell are these guys and what have they ever done for the good of the country? More useless snouts in the trough and most of them are Labour. But as usual nothing will be done about it
- TrevN, Abu Dhabi, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Do the 'peers' pay tax on their daily claims? Because £300 a day, is actually £500 a day to you and me. It may be a silly question but it wasnt clear in the article.
- Bondy, london, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
And what is to be done with peers that are a very real threat to our democracy as well as being hypocrites to boot!?
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3765
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article378140.ece
- R Barker, London, UK, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
I would have no problem with a house of lords on a volunteer basis, get the title and repay the country with voluntary work, was it not this government that encouraged us to join the voluntary sector a while back ? At a stroke it would discourage the present self seeking lot. I do not accept that there are Honourable members - they are all willing to associate with these spivs.
- Wills, Soton, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
If the US can manage with 100 senators surely little Great Britain can do with far less than the 1000+ members of our second chamber. In addition in the 21st century it is time to do away with the nonsensical enobling of ordinary people ( "Sirs" as well as "Lords")whose titles put them on a pedestal suggesting they are superior moral beings when the opposite is true.
- Peterfieldman, paris france, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
It certainly is good value for the Lords themselves. The Commons must rely on just their fat salaries and the expenses that they don't want us to know about. As for the Civil Servants, they will just have to content themselves with annual pay rises and fat taxpayer-funded pensions. No wonder there's next to nothing left for the rest of us who are compelled by law to support this mountain of smug parasites.
- Gordon M, Gerrards Cross, Bucks, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
It is time to return the House of Lords to hereditary peers, and not leave the House in the hands of political appointees. There is not even a semblance of the "democratic" process to curb the current irresponsible greed and self-interest. The current system is a farce created by Blair and his cronees.
- J.L.Gammage, Hereford, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
The time has come to do away with this feudal nonsense where a person can claim huge attendance allowances for just sitting down and dressed up as in pantomime. The ordinary worker puts in more energy in his or her job in an hour than these unelected parasites put in the whole year round. We must be the laughing stock of the planet.
- Awesome Geronimo, Leeds UK, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Put em all in bedsits and damp tower blocks.
They are of no use to the taxpaying public.
- P I Staker, London, SW8, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
These M.P.s are corrupt. They claim expenses for second homes and their contents plus they are paid for pushing projects forward when they know that it is against the law. Many are on the boards of the companies they are pushing to gain contracts. These people are no better than common criminals dressed up in suits and ties. They should be sent to prison and all benefits should be stripped away and money paid back to the tax payer. They make me sick.
- G.A.Gilmartin, Bristol, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
One question.
How do I become a Lord? It seems to be perfect way to top up my oap.
- Colin Macpherson, Gramat France, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Troughs/pigs spring to mind but will anything change I doubt it,we are too complacent.We should be shouting from the rooftops about some members of this august assembly to put a stop to their gravy train rip offs.Will the police take any action not on your life it would,nt be politically prudent.
- roy c, wigan, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
Its all a big tax payer funded racket.
But the common man is helpless, weaponless, and is unable to fight against the political elite that have taken over the country and re-instituted serfdom.
- Trunk, US, 29/10/2009 14:54
Report abuse
