Morning:
8°c
Charles Clarke among 80 MPs defying call to pay back expenses
Paul Waugh, Deputy Political Editor21 Dec 2009
Former home secretary Charles Clarke is one of the 80 MPs challenging official requests to repay his Commons expenses, it emerged today.
Mr Clarke "strongly disputes" the decision made by watchdog Sir Thomas Legg for him to hand back nearly £750 in mortgage claims, and has lodged an appeal with former Appeal Court judge Sir Paul Kennedy.
Mr Clarke is among about 200 MPs who have been asked to repay a total sum running into hundreds of thousands of pounds.
His challenge comes on the day Labour peer Lord Peston hit out at plans to reform the House of Lords' expenses system, warning a crackdown would deter high earners from entering Parliament.
The distinguished economist, 78, said proposals from the Senior Salaries Review Body to curb overnight allowances and other perks would leave Labour with few people willing to work in a possible opposition government.
The row over Lords expenses reignited today when new figures showed 100 peers claimed £50,000 each last year. One Labour peer, Baroness Adams, claimed £67,000 - despite having not taken part in a Lords debate in four years. Some 18 members of the Lords claimed more than £30,000 in housing costs - much more than the maximum £24,000 that MPs received for their second-home allowance.
In their report, the review board recommended that allowances be replaced with a simpler scheme to bring peers in line with reforms being introduced in the House of Commons. This would see overnight expenses limited to rented accommodation and hotels, and - for the first time - they would have to provide receipts.
But Lord Peston, whose son is the BBC's business editor Robert Peston, said that he and others worked "at great personal cost", adding that in his "glory days" he had earned as much as £1,000 a day. He added: "Having spent 10 years slogging my guts out on the Opposition front benches, I do not think that, if I were the same age again, I would remotely consider it my duty.
"My noble friend the Leader of the House should ask, in case of the disaster that we might lose the election, who will do the work on our side?"
Lord Peston was among several peers who criticised the proposals, which would see them accept a £34 cut in maximum overnight allowances in return for a £38.50 rise in other expenses. Peers described as "mean" and "crackers" plans to limit hotel stays to £140 a night.
Today's figures disclose that 17 peers claimed above £60,000, 11 more than £65,000 and one, crossbencher Lord Laird, a total of £73,000. More than 300 claimed in excess of £25,000.
Details of peers' claims for 2008/09 were compiled by Lord Brabazon, chairman of the House of Lords Committee, which runs the upper house.
Reader views (19)
The whole matter of Parliamentary expenses is just part of a much larger problem; in the Fairyland of Westminster money has no meaning, it is just a number on a piece of paper and the more important you are the bigger the figures. MPs think in millions, Cabinet ministers think in billions and if it runs out they just borrow some more and spend it anyway.
Its mind boggling to think that between 1997 and 2005 the UK paid £105 billion to the EU. Even just the £6 billion that Mr Brown was going to give away in Copenhagen would have cost every working person £180.
Money means nothing to these people in Parliament and dealing in these large sums gives them a false feeling of self importance.
The whole system of public expenditure needs to be reined in and anyone that spends public money should be forced to hold an annual public meeting to explain the accounts in the same way a company does.
That would allow the people that are being taxed to ask questions and to remind their representatives where the money comes from and what it costs them.
- Hilton, UK, 22/12/2009 09:33
Report abuse
'Labour peer Lord Peston hit out at plans to reform the House of Lords' expenses system, warning a crackdown would deter high earners from entering Parliament.'
This is surely a garbled version of saying that all BUT high earners would be deterred?
- Mdj E10, london uk, 21/12/2009 22:55
Report abuse
These Politicians/Public sector workers are just glorified Benefit Scroungers!
- Mark A, Warrington, 21/12/2009 21:58
Report abuse
Think not what your country can do for you think what you can do for your country. At £1,000 a day the gracious Lord was better paid than a platoon of soldiers
- Dave B, Beckenham, 21/12/2009 19:01
Report abuse
Champagne socialists are the worst type of politician, they never have the interest of the community at heart and whats more thy dont care because they can afford not to. Clarke has always been an eloquent but very arrogant red under the bed.
- Strongbow Sullivan, Paris,France, 21/12/2009 18:13
Report abuse
Jug ears, nearly bald headed, unshaven, pig-ignorant and fiddling the public purse; anyone would think this was a description of some feckless creature from a sink estate!
Time to throw as much of the Law at him as we would at the latter!
- Anil, Manchester, 21/12/2009 18:12
Report abuse
Pay up Charles and stop whinging.!
- Dhan Raj, Basildon, 21/12/2009 17:20
Report abuse
All this scum must be swilled out of the cesspit at the next election and decent, honest members elected. All those guilty of misappropriation of tax payers' money must face prosecution. When we have swilled out the commons cesspit then a start must be made on the lords.
- R.F.York, Yorks, UK, 21/12/2009 17:02
Report abuse
Both the Commons and the House of Lords appear to be inhabited by people harbouring a superiority complex. That they believe the British taxpayer should subsidise their lives makes them no better than a benefit thief.
- Rachel, London, 21/12/2009 16:24
Report abuse
"deter high earners from entering Parliament"! Wouldn't that be a good idea, given the mess these greedy scum have made of the banking system.
- A. Cameron, Liege, Belgium, 21/12/2009 16:12
Report abuse
Two questions I would ask:-
Why did you want to be in Parliament?
Why do you consider yourselve better than the people you profess to represent - I think of the hundreds of thousands of people obliged to work away from home and family throughout the year, and in most cases they receive minimal expenses (all requiring receipts) and in many cases none at all, often enjoying the privilidge of paying themselves for travel and subsistence.
- Ealderman, Wessex, 21/12/2009 16:11
Report abuse
Oh come now, Mr Clarke. Doesn´t your vision of a "glorious future for the Arts" (unquote) include honesty on the part of MPs? Away with you, you grubby little man.
- Graham Rodhouse, Helmond, Netherlands, 21/12/2009 15:55
Report abuse
Somebody should tell Peston HIS glory days are long gone
- Alex., brighton, 21/12/2009 15:54
Report abuse
See what happens after the next election when the Lisbon Treaty kicks in, and MP's are seen to be superfluous as all Laws implemented comes from the EUSuperstate.
- Bill, Hay~Heath UK, 21/12/2009 15:44
Report abuse
Lord Peston hit out at plans to reform the House of Lords' expenses system, warning a crackdown would deter high earners from entering Parliament.
Yeah right , does he mean elected members of Parliament or the appointed Lords , in both there seems to be no compunction to attend but still be able to draw a salary and expenses . Surely this leaves the high earners enough time in their job and make more money .
Do any of these live in the real world
- Alan Baker, essex .uk, 21/12/2009 15:39
Report abuse
Clarke has already been booted out of Parliment.He is the typical slimeball politician that the UK has put up with.We need to ensure all 80 MPs that refuse to pay back the money they Stole,are Booted out for good at the election.Every newspaper needs to print how much each candidate claimed in expenses come election day,afterall,we the voter have a right to be reminded on this day.
- Dave, london, 21/12/2009 15:26
Report abuse
sack the whole lot.
- Fodil, london,uk, 21/12/2009 15:26
Report abuse
They just still dont get it.
- Chrism, London, 21/12/2009 15:11
Report abuse
Its no surprise that this grubby little man, who thinks he is being denied high office because the system is against him (rather than because we can all see he is not up to the job), should refuse to remove his snout from the trough. Bin him off at the next election and good riddance to him.
- Top Dollar, Hounslow, 21/12/2009 14:23
Report abuse
