Training | 2009.05.17
An end to expenses cowardice | John Baker
MPs must finally accept a clean, accountable expenses regime – then the media should lay off
The current exposures about MPs\' expenses make a tawdry spectacle. But it has been a car-crash waiting to happen, and for those of us who have been urging our parliamentarians to get a grip of the system for years, the whole episode has a nightmarish inevitability.
Over many years, the Senior Salaries Review Body has made recommendations on MPs\' pay, pensions and expenses. The strategic direction of the SSRB\'s reports has been to make proposals to increase basic pay, because all the information one can gather from other public sector comparisons is that MPs are underpaid, not grossly, but by around 15%. But the second vital strand in the SSRB\'s approach has been to try to get a grip of the expenses regime, arguing for full transparency, all expenditure to be receipted and justified, and a much more effective system of audit.
In keeping with this approach, and with the need to ensure that any use of taxpayers\' money is justified, the SSRB has made many recommendations relating to office expenses, travel, employment of staff and, more recently, the so-called additional costs allowance (ACA) covering nights away from home or "second homes". Thus the SSRB argued two years ago that the ACA should not apply to any London MPs now that House sittings are shorter and public transport in London much improved.
But MPs, themselves the writers of the rules, invariably cherry-picked the recommendations, rejecting or kicking into the long grass those they didn\'t like. I have sat in the public gallery at the House of Commons when SSRB reports were debated – listening to MPs, high on their horses, telling their colleagues how no one is going to tell them, honourable members, how their affairs should be regulated, audited, or exposed to public view. Of course, other MPs took a far more realistic view as to what would be right and proper, and were fearful for the reputation of the House – but, alas, they were always in a minority.
At the heart of all this lies decades of political cowardice, where governments and MPs have conspired to repress MPs\' basic pay, the visible part of their remuneration, in the belief that voters will never understand large pay increases for MPs and to give nods and winks to making good the pay deficit by a soft and exploitable – and until now – largely invisible expenses regime.
The way out of the mess is not that difficult – though more difficult in today\'s febrile atmosphere than it would have been last year. MPs must stop writing the rules on their expenses and must continue to accept that all their expenses transactions should and will be fully disclosed. The ACA can readily be abolished and replaced by a much stricter regime that avoids "flipping properties" and repayment of expenses on glitzy repairs or footling items of household expenditure.
Get this right and parliament\'s battered reputation may, in time, be restored. But it will take time. When it is clear that a new, clean, appropriate and accountable regime is in place, then the media, too, need to lay off. It is mischievous to imply, as some commentators love doing, that all expenses are a gravy train. We expect MPs to do their research and take up our cases. We expect them to be in their constituencies. We need them to be in Westminster. So they need offices, staff, to travel, and a place in London to live when working there. It is dishonest to add up all these legitimate costs, throw in the salary, and then imply that the MP gets to take it all home.
So now we need the surgery; then the healing; and we should all try to help the patient recover, not keep picking at the scabs and wounds. It\'s not just MPs\' individual reputations at stake, but the wellbeing of our democracy.
Sir John Baker was chairman of the Senior Salaries Review Body 2002-2008
For more information, please visit
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/may/11/mps-expenses-reform
