Tonight:
5°c
Brown faces defeat over ‘barmy’ plan
23 Apr 2009Gordon Brown was scrambling to avoid an embarrassing defeat over MPs' pay today after a fresh wave of criticism of his plan for a daily Westminster allowance.
No 10 said it wanted to press ahead with a vote on the “clocking-in” payment next week, but there were signs the Government could make key changes to secure cross-party backing.
Anti-sleaze chief Sir Christopher Kelly dealt Mr Brown's plan a potentially fatal blow with a warning that the public would not tolerate any system where MPs were paid without having to show receipts.
His remarks, on the day his Committee on Standards in Public Life launched its own review of the Commons system, fuelled suggestions that the Prime Minister could have to amend his plans to avoid defeat.
Commons leader Harriet Harman hinted at possible changes when she admitted: “What we don't want to do is to precipitate into a whole lot of unintended consequences.”
Whitehall sources added that the government motion next week was still “fluid”.
A meeting between Mr Brown and Tory leader David Cameron and Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg broke up without agreement last night.
Shadow Commons leader Alan Duncan described the daily attendance allowance idea today as “barmy”.
Ms Harman conceded that there was “no perfect remedy” to the problem of the second homes allowance that has been discredited by claims submitted by ministers Tony McNulty and Jacqui Smith.
Senior Labour backbencher David Winnick told her: “As it stands at the moment, it's open to question whether this is the type of reform that will reassure the public that all is well.”
Liberal Democrat MP David Heath said Mr Brown's scheme was drafted “on the back of a fag packet”.
The Tories came up with their own system of paying a Transparent Parliamentary Allowance to fund mortgage interest, rent, council tax and other necessary expenses accompanied by full receipts.
But No 10 said abolishing the so-called “John Lewis list” of furnishings and household items which MPs could claim on expenses would not resolve the problem.
“Take out the bath plugs, take out the barbecues — it still doesn't address it,” the Prime Minister's spokesman said.
Sir Christopher said he did not believe the vote scheduled for next Thursday would settle the expenses issue and suggested it might not even take place.
Downing Street said it was still the Government's intention to put forward a package of reforms for a vote in the Commons next week despite the lack of consensus.
Reader views (14)
Perhaps as well as standing for election, each candidate could state the remuneration they would need for doing the job: then we'd have the direct say on this matter. We wouldn't vote for the cheapest if they were an idiot, we'd have to gauge value for money. I'm lucky enough to have an MP who can justify having claimed a second home allowance while living in the Constituency (Zone 4) because he's a more efficient MP than Churchill...well, he's told us he is.
- Mdj E10, london uk, 24/04/2009 00:05
Report abuse
Pay them a salary. Then pay them an allowance for going to work. Pay them expenses such as meal allowances.
A MEDAL FOR GOING, A MEDAL FOR STAYING AND A MEDAL FOR COMING BACK?
- Tempest Fugit, Newcastl Australia, 23/04/2009 21:20
Report abuse
1)Benchmark policy vs a portfolio of multinational companies, each time taking the most prudent (ie most economical) policy for each area. 2)No claims should be made without valid receipts or recognized if they trangress THE SPIRIT AS WELL AS THE LETTER of the policies. 3)No flat-rate allowances. 4)Regular audit by INDEPENDENT AUDITORS of all of the expense claims. 5)Regular publication of the ranking of spenders. 6)Clear penalties up to & including sacking & prosecution for those who break the rules. This is the least that should be done, especially given the current Financial mess that the "Govern"ment has plunged us into.
- A Britt, Brussels, Belgium, 23/04/2009 18:33
Report abuse
It is an insult to tax payers to suggest that MPs should no longer be allowed to buy and furnish "second homes" at our expense but should be paid an extra £150 per day for turning up for work. Such a suggestion is simply getting off one gravy train and boarding another.
- R.F., Yorks, UK, 23/04/2009 17:56
Report abuse
Why the hell should they be allowed to claim any expenses at all. They all chose to apply for the job for which no qualifications at all are required. Nobody forced them into it, they just wanted to get their snouts into the trough.
- Lezli Taubler, London / UK, 23/04/2009 17:48
Report abuse
This government gets more and more ridiculous by the day. The Prime Minister's television broadcast about MPs expenses - what on earth was he thinking about? - brought into sharp focus the main difference between Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. They're both dodgy, but Tony Blair did mumbo-jumbo and insincerity well. Gordon hasn't the remotest idea.
- John, Richmond, UK, 23/04/2009 17:23
Report abuse
Ralph, GB, is correct in saying that we could abolish hundreds of our MP's with no discernible effect on the smooth running of Parliament or democratic process-this is because as we are in the EU, or Common Market as I prefer to call it, all the power to make laws has been passed to Brussels. At the moment our hundreds of MP's, all drawing large salary and expenses, are often just rubber stamping what has been decided in Brussels or Strasbourg.
- Jon Kent, Hertford. UK, 23/04/2009 17:20
Report abuse
I invite Mr Brown to ask his loyal constituents how many of them earn over £60k in salary and then get an extra £150 per day for turning up to work. Who do these people think they are? They are MPs, each is one of a large crop of MPs and not demi-gods.
- Colin Macpherson, Gramat France, 23/04/2009 17:07
Report abuse
Mickyinlondon. You hit it right on the head, well said great idea.
- Alex., brighton, 23/04/2009 17:06
Report abuse
MP’s, in theory at least, go to parliament to represent their constituents. It is therefore their constituents that should have oversight and approve their wages and expenses.
That might also keep some of them with an ego trip mentality grounded.
- Ian, Reading, England, 23/04/2009 16:23
Report abuse
How do these Labour clowns get dressed each day? Perhaps civil servants dress them, all on expenses? McBrown's £5,000 offer on electric cars is a headline. But the car makers are stunned to find no start till 2011! Brown and Darling are on a different planet. Like Laurel and Hardy they are having a laugh.. at us. Remove 15% of all MP's, especially Scottish ones, and pay the rest 15% more. All expenses need a receipt. Join the real world. Peckham Smith must hand in receipts for the £2,000 a month rent for a Peckham room, only £2,000 would rent a 4 bed house in Dulwich! Something stinks about 'The Peckham Bathplug' Smithy, and not just the sweaty porn watching.
- Demo, birmingham, 23/04/2009 16:21
Report abuse
Harman is clueless as usual. There doesn't have to be a 'perfect remedy”, just a simple and effective one, decided by a panel selected from the public, like jury duty, and WE get to decide what you can or can't have. Anyhing else just perpetuates the con.
Also, get rid of a few hundred MPs, we have got way too many, if the USA can do with only 435 reps, then we should be able to get it down to about less than 100 here.
Is 'Doom and Gloom' Clown STILL claiming Sky subs?
- Ralph, GB, 23/04/2009 15:20
Report abuse
Those money-grabbing imbeciles whom loiter in the House of Conmen will NOT give up one penny of their ill-gotten expenses claims at any cost.
They will shout and spit and claw each other's eyes out - but THEY WILL NEVER, EVER RELINQUISH THEIR BELOVED EXPENSES.
AND TO HELL WITH JOE PUBLIC.
- Reuben Camara, Morecambe/Lancaster, 23/04/2009 15:11
Report abuse
For over 6 years Brian Haw has camped on Parliament Square; through winters and summers; if he can survive in a tent on the grass; then so can MPs.
- Mickyinlondon, london, 23/04/2009 15:00
Report abuse
