ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ

It is an absolute disgrace that these allowances are paid to MPs. Why should tax payers pay to furnish an MP's second home? Many people can't even afford a first home. They should only get subsistence and travel expenses at appropriate rates as is common practice across both public and private sectors.

I'm pleased that the whole recent debate concerning the expenses of MP's, fuelled partly by Nick, has come to this. When we were all feeling a bit disgruntled following the lack of a referendum and the obvious notion that not all of us can afford to shop at John Lewis, it's worthy of a small sigh at least.

Maybe they should downgrade to an Argos list?

And such information being made public for the first time, is likely to be an interesting prospect for us less celubrious subjects, who have to scrimp and save to make ends meet!

No doubt the information will make for interesting reading, and I have no doubt whatsoever that a shake up of the allowance system will work wonders for our beloved government, and the financial fiascos that surround it....

The greed of these 'honorable' members just goes on and on. Hypocritically, they chase after benefit and disability claimants, some who get fifty pound s a week. Nauseating.

Since this fiasco over allowances and family members being paid etc etc arose the only sensible way for this to go IMO
is for mp's to be given a wage of for example Β£200,000 they out that pay for everything travel, staff, office,car,second home, equipment the lot...
They can then spend it on who they want, when they want, and where they want.
This will stop all the inquests and i would suspect allow a major reduction in support staff dealing with these matters in the house of commons.

I would also make all new members fund their own pensions through there salary as well.Salary should be increased by the rate of inflation each year to further simplify the system.

At a time when many of us are struggling to make ends meet, and our household bills ever increasing, it's sickening to see that MP's can claim on expenses for things such as food, let alone Β£10,000 for a kitchen!

However you cut it, Nick, I read this as a victory for everyone. One of the key problems for Britain has been a general disruption and selfishness. Mostly, this has been caused by a minority who tried to game the system in their own interests but it's dragged everyone else down. By developing more clarity and balance sound leadership becomes effortless.

The Tao warns that chaos gives rise to criminals. Where clearer rules and more common understanding is present there is less scope for individuals to profit from this. Competition for huge earnings will decline and generosity will expand as surely as night follows day. Income gaps will narrow to historical norms and general happiness will increase.

As our vision is framed by a gloomy mountain the glint of a new sun is emerging from the shadow, switching attention from the violent and intense legacy of fear and greed, and giving more room for self-understanding and compassion. Buoyed by the sunshine and rainbows of government policy birds will sing and a thousand flowers will bloom accordingly.

All hail Blessed Leader!

I am very much in favour of all this. It may seem a bit petty to some but as a small business owner I've had to suffer for years the needs of the Inland Revenue for a complete record of receipts for every single expense no matter how small that my company incurs.

Foreign clients are bemused when I have to demand receipts from restaurants for any business meals I take them on and I'm left explaining that such is the tax regime here and give them a few anecdotes about exactly how unreasonable the Inland Revenue can be about such things gleaned from my accountants experiences.

Hence when arrogant nincompoops like Labour MP Ken Purchase says "I really don't see why I should be pestered on an almost daily basis, asking about this, that and the other - where will it end? Will someone want to know how much I'm paying for dinner tonight? And what purpose will it serve?" I want to say right back at him what makes him so special that he should be immune from that which the rest of us have to put up with on a daily basis from the Revenue? If the Revenue considers my evening meals important enough to be documented surely even more so his should be?

But I'm not merciless. Lets make a decision not to bother with receipts for purchases under Β£25. In fact let's put the limit back up to Β£250. I would love that. But only if it's a rule for everyone not just arrogant political twits who think they can have a separate set of elitist rules for themselves.

I think all MPs are paid enough as it is. They should have to save up like the rest of us for things like a Β£10,000 kitchen. Or they could start giving all of us that can be bothered to go out to work some allowances or at least a tax relief. As we pay tax on everything we earn and take even more tax off us when we buy things.
I think all of this is a joke, everyone is laughing at those of us who work for a living, just taking the free money they get off of the government. Now we find out the MPs are taking money off of us for televisions, kitchens, nests of tables and whatever else they can claim for.

Faith in politics is already at an all time low. This revelation will only do further damage to the image of politicians and it will be yet another sign of how out of tune they are with the British electorate - especially those on low incomes. Β£160 pounds can be a weeks wages for some, never-mind a days expenses. Whilst everyone wants to see their elected officials able to carry out their duties, they don't want to be buying them a new kitchen - especially if they can't afford a new one themselves!

Why should Mps get such lucrative expenses, they want to be an Mp to serve the country?
Genuine expenses should be allowed.
So that it does not leave them out of pocket, the same as anyone else. I am not allowed to claim for travel to work, But I can claim if i go from my work place to another site.
Why should they have 2nd homes in the city, and in real terms paid for by the public. I wish i could claim more in expenses than i get in salary, i would be better off.
Stil too many loopholes for the MPs to get away with want they want, and a public paid salary with over the top expenses.

Would you mind adding details to your excellent blog of how exactly an elector and taxpayer requests details of the expenses of their current and previous Local MPs using the Freedom of Information legislation?

I for one would certainly do so.

I have NO confidence in MP's what so ever - not in any political party.

The constant financial cheating & on-going revelations about the 'trusted perks' they receive - which very sadly they actually believe are FAIR & JUSTIFIED.

Give the Nurses & the Police a second home & kit it out for free - they do a lot more to support the public than any MP ever will.

It is about time the MP's realised their cosy world of robbing this country just to meet their own selfish needs - are OVER.

The MP who said he now feels like a crook - 'welcome to the real world'. I think you are a crook, but within your secret set of selfish rules - you get away with it.

It really is a gravy train for our so called "representatives" at Westminster. This information should be published in full ASAP and let's see who has had their snout in the trough!

So, we are to expect weeks of shouty headlines in the Daily Mail about MP's spending up to Β£10,000 on their kitchens, presumably by journalists who wouldn't dream of spending so little on their own homes?

Politics used to be something you did after you had achieved in your professional and business life, bringing experience and wisdom with it.

Now being an MP is what you do between leaving university and becoming a well funded consultant.

Is there any wonder that the quality of our MP's and therefore our Government is falling. Wanting to be an MP is the one thing that should exclude you from the job.

Having read the John Lewis list of expenses of MP's I wonder if these second homes are subject to Capital Gains Tax when sold and if the improvements at public expense can be offset against any Capital Gains Tax bill.

It really is a gravy train for our so called "representatives" at Westminster. This information should be published in full ASAP and let's see who has had their snout in the trough!

A very important job, I believe even the dustbin men of this country have an important job, however the politician believe they are something special. If they want to be a politician, accept the rough with the smooth, be like the rest of us stay in a cheap B & B or travel, have your 30 days holiday a year including bank hols and for once in their lives be Honest.

Do the MPs pay tax on these expenses?

I am outraged. We are supposed to be attracting the best and the brightest to politics. With expenses and salaries as they are which high flyer is going to leave the city to become an MP? It might seem like a good deal to a doctor or teacher, but not to any decent MD, partner in a law firm or banker or accountant. Who do we want to run the country? Who do we want in charge of multi-billion pound projects?

It seems to me that the easiest way to deal with this is for the state to own enough flats to house all out-of-London MP's while they are in office. Purchase of these would cost money initially, but be offset by the need to no longer pay expenses and by the savings from not having to raise MP's salaries to cover them buying their own properties.

In addition, the state would own an appreciating asset in the property.

We have the precedence of "grace & favour" property for certain cabinet members. All this would do is extend it to all MP's that need a property until they are unelected and the replacement moves in.

Why is considered needful for MPs to get an increase in pay to buy a new kitchen? We, ordinary people of whatever persuasion, have to save for one!

It smacks of safety in numbers and damage limitation management. Nonetheless, of course the public must be entitled to know how their money is spent.

MPs are by no means unique in working away from home. Thousands of other Britons do it every week.

Everyone must enjoy the same rights of relaxed scrutiny that is, and will continue to be, extended to MPS.

Otherwise there will be one set of rules for them and another for everyone else. An arrangement which is completely unjustified and unacceptable to us.

Given we, the taxpayers, are paying for every single thing on their expenses list I think it is right that we should see what we are paying for.

If an MP buys something out of his or her salary that is a private matter. If they buy something using the money forcibly taken from my salary I want to know what they are doing with it.

It is time for far more openness regarding exactly what our taxes are being spent on.

When claiming expenses for living away from home , the taxman allows me to claim Β£80 per night for meals and accommodation. How do you get selected to become an MP because obviously I'm in the wrong racket.

It's particularly interesting to note that MP's claim they must have special allowances to enable them to keep a SECOND home for their job as public servants in London. Perhaps they would like to make similar payments to teachers and nurses etc so that they could afford their first house in London.

"John Lewis List"!?

What's wrong with the Argos catalogue?

I am alone in wondering why MP's should be entitled to a new television, let alone a new kitchen as an expense?

Our esteemed government have called foul about everyone else's working lives and pay (GP's, those on incapacity, pay rises below inflation for public sector workers). Now we find they may claim the carpet in their homes as a working expense.

Disgusting.

MPs really are taking the micky.

They are well paid and then we subsidise their speculation on the property market.

All MPs' second homes should be taken into public ownership so that the taxpayer rather than the leech benefits.

The fact that MPs claim expenses is fine, but I cannot believe that no one in the HOP has had the decency to ensure that the amounts MPs claim are reflective of the cost of items in the shops.

Β£750 for a television? If MPs work as hard as they make out, I doubt they would have time to make use of a Β£750 television. And Β£10,000 for a kitchen? A lot of people have salaries that aren't much higher than that and yet they still just about manage to have a kitchen and enough food to cook in it. So I hardly think its fair that MPs are allowed ten grand for just their kitchen, and a kitchen in their SECOND home no less.

It's a disgrace that this information has only come out because it was forced out by the freedom of information act rather than an honest MP admitting that the expenses are unreasonably high.

The worst thing is that MPs are now insisting that any change in the expenses is compensated for with a pay increase or some other allowance. If the expenses allowances are too high they are TOO HIGH and therefore no compensation is necessary. This isn't to say that MPs shouldn't continue to receive expenses allowances that REALLY reflect the cost of things that they NEED to buy.

Β£750 for a TV is a bit paltry, though - if I was an MP I would want a big LCD HD model, and Β£750 doesn't go very far in that respect. I guess being an MP isn't as handy as it seems.

Presumably these "MP" allowances will now be made available to us all through the tax system!! I think not.

well i cant believe it i am a disabled person who has just been refused my d.l.a. which is now going to appeal,to think these mps can get all these perks is a scandal,i had to get a social fund loan which i pay back at Β£10 per wek so i could get a new bed 2 months ago yet they can get allowences for a gardener,its a joke.i have had 3 operations on my spine which has left me numb down my left side and i walk with a stoop and is very painful when i move,yet they tell me quote "i can walk perfectly normal"so i will be left with Β£53 per week,yet all this money they can get up and above there normal salaries,what a disgrace this government and this country is no wonder so many people sell up and go to live abroad where they can still get there pensions and heating allowences,mps please note you allow yourselves Β£160 a day and yet expect others to live a month on that amount,how do you sleep at night,i would imagine nice and warm, in a fully fitted flat, in a bed paid for by the tax payer,dont talk about morals talk about immoral thats what it is.david,rochdale.

It is a pity that stories like this enter the public domain without being subject to full debate. The word missed by most commentators is MAXIMUM -this is the maximum amount that can be claimed. Publication of the John Lewis list will not give transparency, it will simply ensure that the MAXIMUM becomes the NORM!! Furthermore, I have yet to see published how often these expenses can be claimed - the scaremongering in the news steers us towards thinking that this is an annual jamboree!!! A similar list exists for members of our Armed Forces who undertake exchange appointments in foreign countries yet there seems to be no mention of this.

I think it's imperitive that all publicly funded personnel or organisations should make available their expenses for public scrutiny. Where can I find details of ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ personnel expenses especially those who film on location both domesticaly and abroad? if not available should not the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ as a publicly funded organisation make these available?

There is a growing apathy for MPs in general and we are creeping into a 'do as i say don't do as i do' attitude from all sides of the Commons.

An honestly disabled person is set to face tough challenges to ensure they get the benefits they deserve because the Government and Opposition does not want anyone claiming something don't really need.

Yet MP's are claiming a scandulous level of expenses which in most cases they don't really need but they do because they can.

Look up the phrase 'Double standards' in the dictionary and you see a picture of the House of Commons.

For me this raises two serious issues which the Parties need to address before the next election - exploiting the expenses being the main one but also should every Constituency have a local man or woman representing them thus preventing the need to claim for a second home and saving the taxpayer a bag full of cash.

How can a public school MP represent the needs of a deprived community?

How can they understand what it is like to get through on a low income when they have this availability to extra cash to bump up their already large apathy.

Of course they want this information out the way. Spin doctors on both sides considering it best to get it out in the open long before an Election. Because if this is still an issue then, Nick you may find yourself reporting on the lowest turn out for a general election in living memory.

I think that the media, and the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ in particular, should feel very proud of this witch-hunt. They have managed to damage the public's confidence in politics even further. This will lead to a further reduction in interest in politics and discourage even more people from taking up politics as a career. The sad thing is that the media then complain that MPs are all faceless and boring - how on Earth are they expected to be anything but given the level of scrutiny which the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ subjects them to? I agree that there need to be rules, but is it really in the 'public interest' for these stories to have this level of attention?

I would also like to see the receipts and salaries for all ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ reporters - perhaps Mr. Robinson, who is so eager to find out what MPs are up to would like to lead the way? After all, his salary, allowances, expenses, pensions, bonuses, etc. all come out of the Licence Fee which is a tax in all but name. Why not lead by example Auntie Beeb?

Come on Nick, publish your expenses too ;)

"...It's called riding the gravy train" (Pink Floyd)

Which days will qualify for the daily allowance ?Attendance in the House,Residence in No2 accommodation,Present in the constituency or every day.Speaker Martin and his committee will sort that out I'm sure !!!!!!!

*Sigh!*
Charles 'E' Hardwidge is a Gordon Brown supporter... 'Nuff said!

MP's made to feel like 'crooks'? How else to describe a community which constantly attacks 'benefit thieves' etc, makes legislation giving those on Incapacity the impression that their illness is an excuse for 'scrounging'; a community forever telling others to tighten their belts etc ad nauseum, while themselves paying for nothing. Β£400 a month for food and the latest 'John Lewis' list show them for what they really are. Pay for nothing hypocritical parasites.

Archane systems, club rules, whispering info to 'new boys' on how to not cause waves; the Palace of Varieties is & has been ripe for reform for years.
The last thing anyone in power wants is the much trumpetted 'Transparency' or 'Openness'.
I will believe the lists will be published, when they are actually in the public domain. There is many a slip between purchase & payment; except in Palace of Westminster & the EU gravy train, too.

Why do MPs get all these housing allowances? Why can't the government purchase properties and then rent them to MPs? In this way when an MP loses his seat the incoming MP just takes over the property. This would prevent all MPs making a mint by buying and maintaining, at the taxpayers expense, a second proprty in London.

Perhaps MPs can explain this to Forces Personnel and their families who have been living for years in Invicta Park, Bulford Bronx and all the other shoddy, dire forces accommodation?

These properties haven't been maintained properly since the sell off in 1996. Β£10k for a kitchen and Β£6k for a bathroom in a second home! We pay rent to the government for our only home properties, complete with mouldy bathrooms and dilapidated kitchens. Fancy a swap?

Nick .. Could you answer a question? Are MPs allowed to keep all of this once they lose their seats? Suppose an MP wins a bye-election but only retains their seat for - say - months before a general election at which they lose. Can they take the Β£750 telly to use at their original home? Or do they have to re-imbuse us for it?

Evidently, I'm in the wrong line of work!

I'd love to hear MPs attempt to justify the level of some of these expenses...

So we have around 600 MPs in the UK. They are able to claim up to Β£24k in expenses. So it appears they can put aside Β£14m for their own lifestyle, but can't find the money to refurbish the dreadful conditions of our Army living quarters. In the words of Ed Balls, 'So What?!'

I was offended to hear the Β£10k Kitchen allowance statement this morning considering I've been saving for 6 years to replace my kitchen.

Things need to change.

Surely the problem to this fiasco is to send in the auditors and check that every bill exists and compare the three years. If there are large variances between years without explanation then we can conclude the MP's are misusing tax payers money. If the MPs have nothing to hide they will nothing to fear from a full audit!

It is a scandal that allowances are claimed like these. In private industry millions have to be spent on checking claims in order to satisfy the tax man that all is above board, in schools, due to lack of funding, teachers may have to buy resources with their own cash, no expenses there, even paper is rationed.
Self seeking greedy spongers, seems an apt description for how MP's could be perceived.

Surely the problem to this fiasco is to send in the auditors and check that every bill exists and compare the three years. If there are large variances between years without explanation then we can conclude the MP's are misusing tax payers money. If the MPs have nothing to hide they will nothing to fear from a full audit!

Have you read the thousands of angry comments re, the budget on the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ Have Your Say site?

These comments come before the latest revelations. Politicians are held in such low esteem now. Just when you think things cannot get any worse for this government...

How about this: these domiciles are supposed to be solely for the purposes of business needs of the ministers in government.

So why not scrap all this and buy a hotel or three and have the ministers use a hotel room assigned to them on need.

Because this is purely for the business need, there's no need to make it five-star accommodation. A bed, TV, shower/toilet is all that's needed.

And from a security standpoint, it is only a few buildings that need to be taken care of, rather than a slew of buildings all over London.

If the minister wants something more upmarket, they can do so at their own expense.

I have no problem with MPs claiming legitimate expenses. And if they are legitimate, what is their problem with publication?

Can someone please explain the link that is being made between publication of expenses claimed and increased salaries?

The obvious conclusion is that there are excessive claims being made and they have stretched well beyond what can be deemed reasonable and necessary to enable them to undertake their duties.

Increasing salaries or introducing a Β£160 daily allowance (whether needed or not!) is just another means of hiding the costs they don't want us to see.

I work in the public sector and if I had to publish my expenses, I'd have no problem - they are well regulated and checked already. The fact that these people have had the privilege of not being subjected to that degree of scrutiny is wrong. Nothing needs to be changed - just carry out proper checks on claims and sack/prosecute those who are found to be on the fiddle. It works for the rest of us!

MPs indignation at being required to disclose expenses is laughable. Have they never heard of the concept of "the person who pays the piper...". It's our money and we have every right to enquire about the spending of our money.

ARENT THEY DOING WELL, ALMOST AS WELL AS ALL THE IMMEGRANTS COMING IN AND GETTING FREE HANDOUTS AT OUR EXPENSE. GIVE MPs THE NATIONAL AVERAGE WAGE, AND LET THEM SAVE UP TO BUY THE THINGS THEY WANT, LIKE THE REST OF US HAVE TO, AFTER PAYING OUR RIP OFF TAXES.

WHy isn't it an Argos list?

these allowanes are a disgrace. I am indebt for 23000. it is going to take me years to pay this off. but the mps get this a year why? we dont get money to furnish our homes so why should they. they earn enough. everything i earn each month is going to pay back my debts which are my own fault and i have learned a very harsh lesson but this allowance seems so unfair to us ordanary workinf people.

Reality check, please.
Of course the MP's knew the broad details of the John Lewis list. How could such a list be kept secret? eg. one MP gets refused for a bathroom expense of Β£11000 and his colleague gets the OK for Β£9000. Figuring out the limit is not rocket science, even for MP's!
The chances of the details of MP's past expenses being revealed are zero. They may reveal future expenses, but the MP's will then know that we will know, so they will change their behaviour.

I AM ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTED THAT THE PEOPLEOF THIS COUNTRY ARE ALLOWING SUCH GOING ONS. Come the revolution!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i think not, we will just continue to allow being told what we can do, and allow them to tell us what they will do. yours - very annoyed

Public inquiry for this was ignored and even though the public didn't want this it got built anyway as our corrupt MP's made too much money out of it from lobbying company's and advertising company's who ensured it got built. M25 was bad enough before this opened. Will be complete grid lock now! Well done MP's! Thanks for all the new noise and this guaranteed white elephant!

Nick, don’t you think our right honourable friends should be setting the highest example and not be dragged kicking and screaming to follow the rules that we have to abide by? How can they claim any form of moral authority?

ARENT THEY DOING WELL, ALMOST AS WELL AS ALL THE IMMEGRANTS COMING IN AND GETTING FREE HANDOUTS AT OUR EXPENSE. GIVE MPs THE NATIONAL AVERAGE WAGE, AND LET THEM SAVE UP TO BUY THE THINGS THEY WANT, LIKE THE REST OF US HAVE TO, AFTER PAYING OUR RIP OFF TAXES.

Given the array of everyday purchases MPs are not required to spend their salary on I can only wonder what it is that they actually do use the their salaries for.

Do they have to hand the stuff back when they lose their seats?

People in business are - broadly - rewarded with salaries which reflect the responsibilties we give them, the expertise they need to apply to their jobs and the value of the product they generate. MPs currently earn a basic salary of less than Β£62000 - equivalent to a middle-manager in many industries and well below the earnings of many consulting professions. I would rather make sure we have competent people making good decisions at the heart of government by paying them salaries high enough to attract the best, not just the most politically driven. Yes, let's have more openness but lets also have more realistic rewards.

I think there is a simple solution:

1. All MPs get a salary and a fixed allowance to run an office.

2. Those who live more than X miles from Westminster get a fixed weekly allowance to live in London during the week

3. All MPs get a travel allowance based on the cost of travelling from their constituency to Westminster once a week.

Simple, transparent and fair.

Surely the problem to this fiasco is to send in the auditors and check that every bill exists and compare the three years. If there are large variances between years without explanation then we can conclude the MP's are misusing tax payers money. If the MPs have nothing to hide they will nothing to fear from a full audit!

I AM ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTED THAT THE PEOPLEOF THIS COUNTRY ARE ALLOWING SUCH GOING ONS. Come the revolution!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i think not, we will just continue to allow being told what we can do, and allow them to tell us what they will do. yours - very annoyed

If I claim something on expenses then that something belongs to my employer.

Does this apply to the honourable members?

If not do they pay income tax on the expense?. Since it is not in fact an expenses claim but just an extra bit of their salary.

One must remember that the vast majority of MP's do not abuse the rules. However, lapses may occur from time to time. The problem is, how do you punish those that have played fast and loose with expenses, stop speaking to them?

Some humility is clearly needed. Lets have them do community work away from their own constituency where they can be themselves and not have to perform for their voters.

fully agree with post number 1. well said colleen!

i dont actually understand why their second home needs to be subsidised to any degree. how many of these spongers are there? 646. of these 74 supposedly represent londoners so by example should be using public transport like the rest of us. So, how much would a decent complex of 1 bed apartments for the rest cost? we could build three or four around london so theyre not too concentrated.
the taxpayer should in no way be subsidising the property speculation that these MPs effectively get away with. after all, when one of them loses a seat/steps down, they dont relinquish their nice three bed semi do they?

When products are sold, do the MPs remit any amounts received back to the Treasury?

I think the list of all MPs' expenses is going to be very interesting, with several MPs potentially losing their seats at the next election over their greed. Who will be able to explain to their constituents why they had to buy a brand new Β£750 TV every year? And where all those TVs are now?

Surely the problem to this fiasco is to send in the auditors and check that every bill exists and compare the three years. If there are large variances between years without explanation then we can conclude the MP's are misusing tax payers money. If the MPs have nothing to hide they will nothing to fear from a full audit!

Let a committee of working class people work out a reasonable amount of exspences for politians then see how many and what quality of personnel
apply for the job , not many I suspect

23. At 07:38 AM on 14 Mar 2008, Mark wrote:

I am outraged. We are supposed to be attracting the best and the brightest to politics. With expenses and salaries as they are which high flyer is going to leave the city to become an MP? It might seem like a good deal to a doctor or teacher, but not to any decent MD, partner in a law firm or banker or accountant. Who do we want to run the country? Who do we want in charge of multi-billion pound projects?

Having seen the way most of those big businesses behave, I'd prefer they stayed in the city. I *want* a doctor running the health service, in fact I think a medical degree should be a pre-requisite.

If I go to the hospital, I want a doctor. I want the guy deciding how much money that doctor needs to give me the best treatment to also be a doctor. If the city boys have to be involved, they should be kept to finding the money that the doctors need.

After all, I'm sure the "best and brightest" can rise to a challenge like that.

I am absolutely disgusted to read of the absolute greed of our MPs. I have worked for the Government for nearly 40 years and even now my wages are less than their allowances. I have to pay for my own food, my own home improvements and my own television. Not only do they tax my paltry pay packet but went I do try and save something out of it they tax the interest and then tax any goods I buy. It is about time they started behaving like DECENT human beings BEFORE they think they are deserved of running the Country.

MPs are absolute disgrace to our country. They are all paid well then why should they be able to make a claim and why should we fund their 2nd homes out of our tax money. People like me can't even make ends meet, and now knowing the fact that my tax money is going them is disgusting. I never had confidence in our govertment but it has been proven.

@15

Francis (and anyone else who is interested in making an FOI request),
the best place to start is the website for the Information Commissioner's Office:

Good luck!

I am not sure what all the fuss is about. I work in a different city for work like many of the MPs. When away I can claim for many things, from dinner, a new TV, to a phone bill. My company works on the basis that expenses should be reasonable and I haven't ever needed a tighter definition.

If we make the MPs' expenses tighter perhaps fewer will choose to spend time in London, or MPs' time will be spent looking for cheaper appliances rather than doing there work.

For instance my flat the company pays for costs €2800 per month. However, it is near to work and was easy to find. It's not cheap but my time is more valuable doing my job. I hope the same is true of MPs also.

Compared to the rest of the Government's costs this is a nothing. I expect all the effort to investigate this is more damaging to the tax payer than the expenses themselves.

Lets treat the MPs like proper professionals and give them sensible expenses. We can judge them on what they deliver not what they spend.

I am staggered by the arrogance of our MP's, I am a divorced middle aged person who works dammed hard with a reasonably paid job around Β£36,000 pa. I have to travel around the country and for that I get a car which I rarely use for personal travel. I am taxed at every turn to support idots in Westminster, Immigrants sending their Family Allowance back home, Chavs and Wasters. Well I am sorry enough is enough, I am tempted to pack in work, not pay my mortgage and council tax and live off the state or maybe we need another Oliver Cromwell.

Why do MPs get all these housing allowances? Why can't the government purchase properties and then rent them to MPs? In this way when an MP loses his seat the incoming MP just takes over the property. This would prevent all MPs making a mint by buying and maintaining, at the taxpayers expense, a second proprty in London.

Ask your MP about MPs' allowances and expenses, and I would expect that you'll get a response similar to my own MP. In his email to me, he replies that it "is reasonable to expect that accommodation will be provided for them (MPs)" and that "it would be expected that the normal domestic items would be included in their rented hotel or flat" or purchased property. I appreciate that many MPs need to work away from home for long periods, but I do not expect to be picking up their tabs for food, new kitchens in their second homes and all the other normal living costs that the rest of us have to meet out of our incomes. So, what do MPs pay for out of their generous salaries? Very little, it seems!

No doubt a way will be found to wriggle out of showing their expenses .

Do bear in mind that most MPs could be earning far more than their Westminster salaries if they were in finance, business, law, or another similar career. I'm not defending the excessive allowances, but there surely needs to be an appropriate benefits package for a job which entails immense responsibility, stress, incessant press criticism, long hours, etc.

And as a side note, aren't ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ journalist expenses publicly funded...? Because if so I'd quite like to see their allowances as well.

The state already owns a number of "grace & favour" residences that go to people in certain offices. Why can't the state buy enough flats to house all out-of London MP's that would be allocated to them for use for the duration of their elected period (in the same way as they are given office space).

The cost would be offset over time by the saving in expenses that would then not be incurred. That way we could stop paying anything other than travel expenses and the state would have what (hopefully) would be an appreciating asset. It would also remove any arguement MP's have for doubling their salaries.

If I can afford one house on Β£30,000, then they can afford two houses on Β£60,000. We pay the MP's mortgage for his second pad, pay to furnish it, and pay to upgrade it. It's a timeshare, when can I stay in it?

Make the Party's fund their own MP's accommodation costs. If the Party decides not to and their MP isn't close enough to vote as a result, then the Party runs it's own risk of losing any division.

I'm with Mark (comment 58) on this.

All MP's attending parliament, should be "put up" in secure Travelodge-style accommodation if an overnight stay is required.

I'm sure parts of the Palace of Westminster could be converted for such a purpose.

All rooms would be adequately and (more importantly) identically furnished, negating the requirement for kitchens costing Β£10,000!

Whenever I'm away from home on business, all I require is somewhere to "get my head down". The last thing I would want to do is stand in a kitchen (however much it cost to install) and cook something!

Plus, when would I have the time to go shopping, in order to ensure my Β£10,000 kitchen was fully stocked, on the off-chance that I fancied "creating something" after a hard day's debating?!!

Can anyone tell me what happens when MEP's have to stay overnight in Brussels?

Hopefully this will bring home to the 'Honourable Members' that they work for US, not the other way round...
Incidentally - I'm pleased to note that I frequently bump into my own (Lib Dem) MP, fighting for a standard-price seat on a commuter train to and from Kings Cross, like the rest of us...

I travel 1.5hrs to and from work each day, at my own expense. I've decided to ask my company to buy me flat and furnish it to enable me to live closer to where i work. Obviously i wouldn't want to pay tax on benefits in kind and hopefully they will also pay the interest on my mortgage at home......dream on...i'd need to be a politician to merit this. It's a disgrace and they should be ashamed of themselves. I doubt if there are any MP's looking forward to the forthcomming exposure.

I agree with many of the comments on here. However, if you think this is bad just head over to Brussels and have a look at what goes on over there!

There is a simple solution for the John Lewis items. When the MP is chucked out by the electorate make them pay back the full amount of the cost of the bathroom / kitchen / other non-consumables, plus interest calculated on the same basis as the inland revenue calculates unpaid tax.

Presumably they sell the second home when they leave parliament?

Perhaps the good that will come out of these disclosures is twofold:-

1. Maybe a few more people will start to ponder how cost-effectively public services are managed, when the very people who are responsible for them have such a loose connection between value and decision-making, preferring instead to work by the rule that entitlement is the all-important factor.

2. Perhaps some will question how much the demand at the top-end of the market is determined by entitlement rather than by individual economic rationality. How much spending on first-class travel, 5 star hotels, Β£100 a cover restaurants actually happens because the participants are entitled to have someone else pay for it? How many MP's would choose to spend Β£10,000 on a kitchen if they were given a reasonable allowance for out-of-pocket expenditure, rather than general reimbursement for all and sundry?

The point being that it's a distortion of the competitive process for there to be a major allocation of resource into areas that individuals would be very reluctant to pay for, were they not to be in possession of an expense account. Does it matter? Well the rationale of a capitalist economy is that true competition will benefit all, so to entrench in the system practices that negate competition must surely run contrary to what we claim to be a correct philosophy. Mustn't it?

Why can't a block of flats be bought and suitably furnished and each member allocated one with NO other expenses paid?

I think that we should all wait until the expenses are published before making up our minds.

Michael Portillo's comments last night were interesting. I suspect that one or 2 MP's won't be at Westminster after the next election.

the interesting thing will be if the set of expensesfor the year after the publication come close to the ones before.as most MPs seem to consistently clain near the maximum any sudden decrease could and should be embarrassing.
yours john field

We, the general public, must accept a good deal of responsibility for the current state of affairs regarding members' allowances. The ever-present fear of public outcry whenever MPs conscience an increase in salary is well evidenced by the recent refusal of both sides of the house to accept an independently endorsed above inflation pay rise; to say nothing of the envious bleating that comprises the bulk of the comments in reaction to this post. It is this climate, generated by the vast majority of the general public and fostered in turn by the vast majority of media, that has forced an increasingly large proportion of members' remuneration to be incrementally allocated to more opaque areas: that is, not to salaries, but to allowances (which incidentally, are not the same as expenses for the purposes of tax deduction).

The system is far from perfect, especially now that the maximum limits of the 'John Lewis list' have been made available to MPs and the public. However, to suggest that MPs are grossly overpaid for the important and diligent work that the majority of them perform is nothing short of the politics of jealousy.

Before anyone asks: I work in the private sector, for a small business, earning well below the national average.

Greedy Westminister Pigs - That is what members of parliament can be seen to be. Even the well off MP's take these allowances.

These MP'S need cutting in number by a third (400) and have all allowances removed including the communications allowance (Otherwise known as the taxpayer funded incumbacy allowance). If they don't like it they can clear off - no one forces them to be MP's - It may also stop some of the greedy pigs staying well past their sell by date. Not all MP's are greedy pigs with their snouts in the trough but their are far to many and the pigs should be given the chop!

Interesting that it is only going to go back 4 years when MP's have to make these expenses go public. How many more expenses do they get and will these be kept secret or does someone else have to use the freedom of information act to see what's really going on behind our backs. MP's are in their job to serve the general public. Will be a great day when just one of them actually does what they are supposed too! How can they actually say people are treating them like criminals. Of course we do because they are!
P.S. Do you think we could use the freedom of information act to get a yes or no answer from an MP for the first time ever?

I suspect MPs at Westminster is the just the start. What about the expenses of MEPs & Euro Commissioners? No doubt they are swimming laps of their gravy pool at our expense. Do MPs realise that apathy and disillusionment are slowly destroying democracy in this country of ours?

How could Mr Martin justify claiming for his Scottish house when he incurred no extra cost in London as he lives in a luxurious pad funded by us (the taxpayer!)

OUR members of parliment just look after themselves once they get in office, the public dont matter, they give money away to anybody who enters England,so long as there expenses are never touched.

OUR members of parliment just look after themselves once they get in office, the public dont matter, they give money away to anybody who enters England,so long as there expenses are never touched.

Why is there such a witchhunt against MPs? This is media-driven rubbish. MP's need two homes so they can work in their constituency and in Westminster. That's their job. The reporters and editors responsible who earn many times over the pay of an MP should publish their own expenses and stop trying to wreck peoples trust in politicians by stooping so pathetically low. (and can people stop over-using the phrase "taxpayers money" like they're personally writing a Β£10,000 cheque for a particular MPs kitchen.)

MP's should not get an increase just because they won't be able to fiddle the new expenses as well as before. They say they are paid less than senior businessmen and some Head Teachers. Well to be an MP requires NO QUALIFICATIONS at all. They are not heading anything most are just groundtroops who follow the party whip. Many can't be bothered to turn up at all. If the present salary is too little for the barristers and accountants, then maybe some will leave and we'll get a more representative cross-section in Parliament. There should be no more than 250 MP's and they should only get transport / subsistence etc if they attend the chamber for 4 hours on a given day. Lastly the holidays are obscene, 30 days + 1 per year of service up to 40 days is quite sufficient. Time the gravy train hit the buffers. Self interest is all this lot are in it for.

Nick, I think someone should be asing questions on the subsidy of MPs mortgages on second homes and the treatment of capital gains tax when they sell.If the rumours are true we have a bigger story than the 'John Lewis' account.

Nick, I think someone should be asing questions on the subsidy of MPs mortgages on second homes and the treatment of capital gains tax when they sell.If the rumours are true we have a bigger story than the 'John Lewis' account.

MP's say they will give up these perks if their basic salary is increased. However they already get paid Β£62K ayear, plus expenses, for doing a job which requires no qualifications whatsoever!

Surely the cost of a carpet or a bath is just skimming the surface rather han looking at more major "discrepancies"

Ofcoursean MP needs to be paid properly,do we want MPs subsidised by their Union or rich tory Landees "playing" at it

The Β£10k "given" to MPs for new kithchens only apply to repair and does NOT include betterment

And peole complaining about MPs having 2nd homes and should relly on travel expenses - have they tried the train service from places such as Crawley, let alone somewhere like Scotland :)

Interesting that it is only going to go back 4 years when MP's have to make these expenses go public. How many more expenses do they get and will these be kept secret or does someone else have to use the freedom of information act to see what's really going on behind our backs. MP's are in their job to serve the general public. Will be a great day when just one of them actually does what they are supposed too! How can they actually say β€œpeople are treating them like criminals”. Of course we do because they are!
P.S. Do you think we could use the freedom of information act to get a yes or no answer from an MP for the first time ever?

I don't think the exact cost that MPs spend on beds/kitchens/meals is of any great importance. The disgrace is that their expenses are not subject to the same income tax laws as everyone else in the country.

Perhaps if some of these MPs were to get proper jobs they might realise that everyone else has to submit receipts for expenses.

Even as a student that pays a relatively negligible amount of tax to the state, I feel absolute outrage and contempt towards these already over paid MP's. Aside from a handful of them, how many actually do anything of note to make the country a better place? Cast the occasional vote on a new bill...or heaven forbid, have to debate such a thing, how strenuous!
Allowing them to improve their standards of living at taxpayers expense is genuinely disgusting, and that's irrespective of the fact that Mr. Recession is knocking at the door thanks to some of these people and their ill advised, narrow minded, selfish attitudes towards the common man.

What inflames the situation even more in my opinion is that it's going to take several months and probably longer, for this information to be published. Spin doctors 1 - 0 general public.

Take away all MP benefits and make them live off of their already extortionate salary. They are nothing but pillagers, "yes men" and self preservationists.

I am 18 years old and ashamed of every facet of the government which allegedly represents me.

JUST LIKE MANY TEENAGE THUGS ARE LAUGHING AT THE LEGAL SYSTEM, MPS ARE LAUGHING AT THE TAXPAYER

Correctly there is a lot of indignation about these expenses. But how long will it last? I suspect that in a few months - certainly long before the next election - this will be forgotten and our 'honourable' representatives will continue to milk the system

I suggest a block of flats consisting of a bed-sit for every M>P> and a communal dining hall. Second homes are not necessary when working away from home.Let them slum it like the rest of us.

All this furore about expenses, employing family etc, etc.
I am just deeply saddened that the government and mp's seem to spend more and more time sorting out their own little citadel in Westminster. Yet less and less time governing the country. And the country is what their principal salary is paid to them for!!!!!

An enquiry chaired by the Speaker, who himself has claimed dubious expenses? Leaving no stone unturned, I'm sure! Let's get a few members of the public to run the enquiry instead, shall we?

Shouldn't being an MP be something we should all aspire to? A position we should see as a nation as being one of stature? If so (god forbid we don't!) then surely some perks are appropriate. These men and women hobnob with others in the "higher reaches of society" who earn vastly more and do little for the greater good. They deserve to be on an equal footing. Also these expenses mean a huge amount more for MPs from less priviledged backgrounds and I am sure in an honest moment are part of their desision to have a go! My gripe is that these sort of perks should in some way be extended to other "worthies". Teaching should be up there for a JL list I think, that's where our futures lie after all.

It's the arrogance and insensitivity of MP's that's unbelievable. At a time when our Armed Forces are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan some at below the minimum wage (when calculated on an an hourly basis), why can't they claim for "essential" items in their "second" homes. Their families have to pay postage on parcels and these MP's argue that they should be treated differently. No wonder the voting public has such a fundemental dislike for these individuals which is described as voting apathy.....it's not apathy, it's dislike & a complete lack of trust that our interests will take priority over their self-serving attitude.

When "Expenses" come into it the system is wide open to abuse. Answer
----no more "Expenses. A flat basic rate suitable for the job and MPs to pay a much bigger contribution to their pensions themselves

Terry

This whole debate obscures why MP's receive large salaries and expenses well in excess of their electors in the first place.

Whatever amendements or declaration changes are made this will always be the case because the whole purpose of being in Parliament in the guise of representing their electors, not to challenge the economic and social structure of society.

While they all masquerade in three main parties they all support market forces, pro America and its foreign policy and War on Terror, and pander to scare stories like Crime.

Look at the Northern Rock debacle and how the state is being used to subsidise with taxpayers money so many other areas of market failure. What is happening is an indictment of neo-liberal economic global policies that have been pursued by both Tory and New Labour governments. Yet with the Labour PLP full of Chartered Accountants, Estate Agents, Academics and Avon Ladies there is not one socialist voice highlighting this travesty.

Consequently this is why an MP's salary and expenses will always be high as it acts as an inducement to toe the line and not to rock the boat.

In theory the obvious check on Parliamentarians in a market economy is to limit their salaries to the average industrial wage. Until that is done which it won't, Parliament today is merely a mouthpiece for Big Business and Finance!

If all those expenses would be spend more wisely Public transport (it works ever so well in neighbour countries why not here?) Housing, Health sector etc.Britain would be a better place to live.

MP's choose their profession like most of the rest of us.There are thousands of people that work away from home all week and have to stop in seedy B+B's,very often sharing a room with their colleagues.I bet every one of them would love a second home paid for and furnished by the tax payer.Why do MP's believe they are a special case? The government should build a student type halls of residence near Westmister to house the few hundred MP's that live too far away to commute and charge them a rent like they do the studets.I for one, am sick and tired of been ripped off of my hard earned cash by political leaches who think they should have more than the rest of us.

nick, forget the 'john lewis' account, am i right in thinking that MPs also get their interest paid on their second home mortgages and CGT is waived when they sell?
also (different subject i know) in what parallel universe (MP world?) is inflation 2.1%? in my world it seems to be somewhere between 15% and 20%.

100 years ago being an MP wasn't paid so the only people who did it were very very rich. Is that what all those outraged voices on here really want? Babies and bathwater anyone?

We have to work damn hard just to earn money to pay the bills. The chances of us owning our first house are very unlikely (we could only get a mortgage of Β£70,000 which leaves us Β£100,000 short of the minimum for property in this area).A joint income for my partner and myself of Β£20,000 would be nice but is not going to happen. Incidently I earn about Β£12,000 as a public sector employee (this years pay rise 1.8%)so it is extremely insulting when politicians complain about our excessive pay demands!

Abolish their allowances and double their salaries - they're not paid enought for the work that they do and we all know that.

Putting them up in the equivalent of a Travelodge? Would the person who suggested that like to live 5 years on one?

THE GOVERMENT GAVE PENSIONERS AN EXTRA Β£50 HEATING ALLOWANCE FOR 2008,HOW FAR WILL THAT GO KEEPING THEM WARM,WHEN OUR MPs CAN CLAIM FOR ALMOST ANYTHING THEY JUST KEEP FILLING IN THERE EXPENSES CLAIM FORMS AND COLLECT THE MONEY,THE PUBLIC ARE BEING RIPPED OFF.

MPs are paid expenses because to increase salary wouldn't look good. It's the kind of device one sees when a company employs agency staff so that the headcount figures don't go up. Whatever the outcome of the review it's about time we were honest about what we want. When in opposition, Labour protested strongly about MPs having second incomes - I well remember the furore that was kicked up with a picture of a dentist, a Tory MP, maintaining his craft for a couple of days a week. Without people with a sense of the real worlds we were then left with a new Government full of professional politicians, trades unionists, Poly lecturers and lawyers. This total absence of common/business sense means that nothing works in this country any more - regardless of the dodgy stats that keep coming out, seemingly produced by the UK equivalent of Comical Ali (the former Iragi information minister). The answer? If it's truly the case, independently judged, that MPs should be paid more then fair enough. We can't have a system that only appeals to the bottom of the barrel; we need people in Government who can actually govern.

I have recently retired and have a small private pension which is taxed, I also took on part time work for a period,this income was taxed and reduced my tax allowance after retirement,I had then to pay further tax on the total income.
I have just replaced my windows to reduce my fuel bills,upgraded my kitchen and purchased a new TV.I wonder if the revenue will allow this against the tax I have paid since I retired. Doubt it

Vic Simpson

Nick,

I'm only posting here as not sure where else to. I'm astonished that nowhere on the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ politics website can I see it reported that the Sunday Times opinion poll showed the biggest lead for the Tories in years at 16%.

This is a poll after the budget and shows Labour down 6% from last time, it is only one poll but how come this doesn't merit any coverage??

Can I recommend this excellent site for more info if polls are of interest to readers

www.ukpollingreport.co.uk

Why do the allowences need to be replaced with an increase in pay or a daily allowence?

Surely the whole point of this exercise was to keep an eye on how they spend our money! If they get money another way, they will continue to spend it how they want and we will be none the wiser!

Glyn Post 137
Put up in a travel lodge for 5 years ... they only work about 30 weeks a year, Monday pm to Thursday. That is only 90 nights give or take a year! Many are happy to spend almost that much holed up in luxury hotels on fact finding trips and on trade delegations again at our additional expense!
If the accomodation was that basic maybe they'd be quicker getting home "to allow Constituency time", not having a well furnished pad in London would encourage them back closer to their electorate!
Having stayed in a similar hotel 4 or 5 Nights a week for 6 months, I can assure you that you really get to value the conversation of others!

MPs are vastly underpaid considering the demands of the jobs and the unsociable parliamentary hours. How are MPs suppose to support a family, and establish themselves on housing market on Β£60,000 a year?

All this as blown up after the Government's redculas policy of not paying pubic employers enough Which includes MPs, and Media commentators including yourself Nick are unfairly treating all MPs as corrupt.

Why should the government and all MPS should be at the mercy of the media all of the time and when is the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ going to become more "transparent" ???

Jesse Erlam

Re post 137, I am employed by the Government and for 7 years it was necesary for me to work away from home. I had a single room, one toilet and shower facilites shared by 3 others. The room was significantly smaller than found in a Travelodge.Like M.P.S's I could go home at weekends. Unlike M.P.'s I had to pay for everything while working away, with the exception of a midday meal. This did mean duplicating things, which of course I had no space for when I returned home full time and had to give away for peanuts.

If M.P.s are saying they need this, then surely they should offer it to all employees, most of whom are on substantially less money. M.P.s need to wake up and smell the roses. These allowances are beyond the pale and so far beyond ordinary people's experience as to be unbelieavble

No wonder MPs are so frightened when the public question their integrity!

For 40 years as a Public Servant (RAF) I had to account for every penny that I spent and re-claimed as 'expenses'(and have it independently authorised). This was required by 'regulations' i.e. parliament, to prevent me defrauding the taxpayer - even if it cost a Β£1 to protect a 1p.

Who was keeping an eye on our elected representatives during this time?

Lets give no more money to MP's. I suspect we will all save more money if the MP's have to submit expenses claims. After all the press will have a field day with this new information.
John Lewis says, "Never knowingly undersold", now the public can " Never knowingly be underestimated".

Nick - What about the House of Lords expenses?

In the 'fair society ' they keep telling us is their goal, I think it appropriate that employees of the state are subject to the same rules as other employees.

Thus, MP's expenses should be taxable unless they can prove they were 'wholly, exclusively and necessarily ' incurred in the course of their employment. Full records , kept for 6 years and supported by invoices for each item regardless of amount.

Then hand the whole show over to HM Revenue and Customs for policing. They can levy the tax , interest and penalties for those failing to comply. Problem solved.

#137 they are only in westminster a small part of the time, they have about six months holidays , attend a few days a week at other times , so travelodge should be more than good enough for them. Bunch of crooks.