Anger as MPs reject reforms to expenses

[Sash]

MPs yesterday threw out a series of proposed reforms to their expenses when 33 ministers joined forces with a cross-party group of backbenchers to maintain the "John Lewis list" to finance furniture for their second homes, and rejected any external audit of their claims.

Amid heated exchanges in the division lobbies, the Tories claimed that government whips struck a deal with Labour backbenchers in which they were given free rein to preserve their £24,000 additional costs allowance (ACA) while voting down an above-inflation pay increase.

The Conservative leader, David Cameron, who ordered his shadow cabinet to back the reforms, was sworn at by one Labour MP as he voted.

George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, had an angry exchange with the prime minister's parliamentary aide, Ian Austin, as at least four cabinet ministers and 29 other ministers voted down the reforms. The ministers included: Jacqui Smith, the home secretary; Andy Burnham, the culture secretary; Paul Murphy, the Welsh secretary; Shaun Woodward, the Northern Ireland secretary; and Nick Brown, the deputy chief whip.

The row erupted after MPs heeded a call from Gordon Brown for pay restraint when they rejected, by 196 votes to 155, a proposal to raise their salaries by up to 2.3% this year and 4.7% next year. The vote means MPs will get a 2.25% pay rise this year and be denied a "catch-up" payment of £650 a year for the next three years.

Government whips were then seen nodding Labour MPs through the aye lobby when they voted on a backbench amendment, tabled by former minister Don Touhig, to preserve their expenses. While the votes were free, whips often give an informal indication of how MPs should vote. The vote, by 172 to 144, to reject reforms advised by the Commons members estimate committee, means:

· MPs can continue to claim for furniture and household goods for their second homes, known as the John Lewis list as the Commons only authorise payments in line with goods from that retailer;

· Additional costs allowance will remain and not become an overnight expenses allowance with £19,600 ceiling;

· No outside audit of MPs' expenses;

· No receipts for claims under £25;

· Claims for outer London MPs will not be cut.

The Tories last night criticised Brown for voting to restrain MPs' pay but not turning up for the vote on expenses. Chris Grayling, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said: "David Cameron and the shadow cabinet voted for the abolition of the John Lewis list while Gordon Brown and his most senior ministers went awol. They are showing blatant contempt for very real public concerns."

Nick Harvey, a Liberal Democrat member of the members' estimate committee, criticised the vote. "It was a total own-goal on the part of the House of Commons. An opportunity to put our house in order and be seen to put our house in order has been passed up. They took all the nice bits of the package but not the ones they didn't like. They took the spoonful of sugar but refused the medicine."

Touhig told Harvey: "The main thrust of this report is an audit system which is uncosted. It will cost the taxpayer millions."

The vote for pay restraint followed a heated debate in which older MPs insisted members should be paid more generously. David Maclean, the former Tory chief whip who is MP for Penrith and Borders, said: "We have the responsibility of making mega, mega decisions and for that we are getting the level of pay of a second-tier officer in a district council."

Harriet Harman, the Commons' leader, also announced the government would introduce a regulation to exclude MPs' addresses from freedom of information requests.


Westminster: Anger as MPs reject reforms to expenses and limit pay rises | Politics | The Guardian



I wonder how long it will be before people start to riot. How can they justify expenses of this nature when most ordinary hard working people are struggling to make ends meet. Beggars belief!

[emma roids]

and why shouldnt the leaders of our glorious country be entitled to a pay rise to reflect the great work they do??






















im am of course been sarcastic, fekking greedy barsterds

[Mars]

[quote=emma roids;670889]and why shouldnt the leaders of our glorious country be entitled to a pay rise to reflect the great work they do??

LMFAO they are a bag of shat, lol all stuck up ponces who were born with silver spoons up their asses, they have no idea of what it's like to live in the real world,
put em all on the minimum wage and make em do 60 hours a week.
useless %&*ts!!!