Ann Widdecombe defends proper pay and reimbursement for MPs

Yesterday the Commons voted to limit annual spending on furnishings to £2,400 but Ann Widdecombe MP warned her colleagues against 'crawling on their bellies' in the face of "malicious" attacks from the media.

Ann Widdecombe: "Both Front Benches remind me of those Governments who hold referendums, and when their citizens give them an answer they do not like, hold them again. We should have faced the fact that the House made clear its view on the so-called John Lewis list, and we should have found ways of making it transparent, rather than trying to abolish it altogether.  The contributions made by Members on both sides of the House today have been largely conditioned by the mischievous and malicious onslaught of the media and the public prints, not just over the past few weeks but over the past few months. Our response to that should not be to crawl on our bellies, but robustly to defend what is right. Yes, it is right that we should have better reporting and more transparency, but it is not right that we should make it impossible for hon. Members to carry out their duties... We should have had the guts to defend ourselves, just as we should have the guts to do so when the press talk about our lavish perks and include our secretaries. There have been some hon. Members for whom their secretary has been a perk, but precious few of them. Such is the view out there that Adam Boulton, who is supposed to be politically wise, actually stated on his programme as though it were a matter of fact that our secretarial allowances are paid directly into our bank accounts... I, like most hon. Members, do not benefit from one penny of my secretary’s or researcher’s salaries, or from one penny of what goes on computers, stationery and postage. We do not benefit, and to have that portrayed as a perk is ridiculous.  If there is one thing that we should have done it is to abolish the word “allowance” and to substitute the word “reimbursement”, and to have that which is centrally provided not counted as our personal allowances."

"...We should stop crawling before this press onslaught. Yes, there have been abuses. Do we blame all general practitioners for Harold Shipman? Do we say that because a handful of teachers have been convicted of paedophilia, all teachers are bad, and that because more than a handful of accountants are crooks, all accountants are bad? As for lawyers, I will not even go there. The answer is no. Therefore, although there have been and always will be some people in Parliament who are not as straight as they should be, we should not allow ourselves to be tarred by that.  We deserve to be paid properly, we deserve to be reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred, and we deserve to be allowed to do our jobs properly. If we do not do that, one of two types of people will come into the House: those who can afford not to be recompensed and those whose pay is so low that to them it all looks like something very grand. The vast ranks in between—the professionals, those who are paid a reasonable but not excessive amount—will not come to this place, and the press and the media at the moment are doing their level best to ensure that Parliaments of the future will be composed of people of substantially lower quality than Parliaments of the past."

MORE IN HANSARD.

***
This section is also interesting, in which Douglas Hogg MP questions the Conservative Party's decision to use an Opposition Day debate for Members' Allowances:

"Historically, this matter has been for the House, not for whipped party votes. Therefore I have difficulty in understanding why it is being debated on the Supply day. Incidentally, as we do not live in unfurnished boxes, why should there be a prohibition on reimbursement for furniture and household goods? Provided that it is modest, transparent and audited, what is the objection?"

Theresa May MP: "My right hon. and learned Friend mentioned whipped votes on this issue; I merely point him to the fact that it is because the Government were unwilling to stand by the Prime Minister’s undertaking to support the Members Estimate Committee report—they failed to whip the votes—that the House is in this position today."

Simon Hughes MP, Liberal Democrat, then intervenes on Mrs May: "The thrust and direction of what the right hon. Lady is saying has warm support from the Liberal Democrat Benches. However, she must accept that we would not be in the mess that we are in today if 21 Conservative Members of Parliament had not voted against openness and transparency, rather than in favour of it. If they had voted with her, what she and I want would have gone through on 3 July."

Mrs May: "I note the hon. Gentleman’s support for the general thrust of what I am saying, but I merely say this to him. The House would not be in this position today if the 29 Liberal Democrat Members who stayed away had turned up to vote on 3 July. They included the right hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Clegg), who, significantly, failed to show leadership on the MEC report."

HANSARD.

Comments

[London Tory]

This dreadful woman, aided and abetted by her equally greedy cohorts the Wintertons and David MacLean, are clearly impervious to the impression they are creating.

The Wintertons should be compelled via pressure from HQ to the local associations to stand down next time. It seems to have escaped Widdecombe's attention that she owes her now lucrative living solely to the voters of Maidstone and The Weald, without whom she would merely be a scatty old aunt playing with her cats.

Enoch Powell once memorably declared that MPs were, by definition, honourable persons. Thanks to the Winterton's and Widdecombe's of this world, not any more.

Shame on them.

[support the strivers]

Noone disagrees they should be paid and reimibursed for expenses properly incurred. Equally, AW is right - the press should not set the agenda.

HOWEVER, the issue is what happens to those (all parties) found to have claimed for inappropriate expenses - nannies, claiming Principal Private Residence relief for houses for CGT and declaring the house to be the opposite for expenses allowances (this is one the press and Inland Revenue have actually missed), moss removal in gardens.

In the private sector, the person would be fired and the police might even be called.

THAT is the issue. Not sure if AW, an intelligent MP, is deliberating missing the point and if so, why....

[grumpy old man]

Dear Mrs Widdicombe. The question is not that lawmakers do not deserve to be adequately rewarded and compensated, but how a system built on trust and Christian morality has been misused by a few who do not deserve the former quality and do not possess the latter. DC deserves nothing but praise for rooting out the few corrupt lawmakers in the Conservative Party. That he was able to secure the support of the majority of lawmakers in Parliament, all but the Magnificent 7, is greatly to the comfort of the Tory faithful and reassuring to the electorate. Various opinion polls show that DC's actions have restored faith in us to the point where it was before the scandals started. you are one of the few long-serving MP's with a strong moral code, and I am saddened that you are on the wrong side of this argument.

[Felicity Mountjoy]

Well said Miss W!

[benefit taker]

The point is not that only a few MPs are guilty of theft, at the level of tens of thoushads of pounds, which would see others in jail. It is that the entire house is guilty of shielding them from proper punishment.

Until guilty parties are properly punished with jail and fines every MP shousl feel ashamed they are part of the cover up, Ann included.

[proper justice]

"Yes, there have been abuses. Do we blame all general practitioners for Harold Shipman?"

She doesn't get it. The BMA didn't convene an internal process to let him escape with a mild ticking off - the full force of the law was applied.

Whither Derek Conway, Michael Trend, Spelman etc each of who have a prima facae case of embeslemenet running into many thousands?

[Cleethorpes Rock]

It's fair that MPs have somewhere to live in London and should be able to claim some travel expenses. It is wrong that MPs use taxpayers' money to acquire second homes at a profit. The Wintertons claiming rent for a home already owned outright is nothing short of embezzlement.

To see David "Quadbike" Maclean on TV defending the whole racket made me sick. Who will rid us of these turbulent MPs?

[Ali T]

Whilst I respect and admire Anne, who has been an amazing Member of Parliament I do disagree with some of what she has said on this issue.

There is no problem in paying MPs properly for the job that they do which involves working unsociable hours, taking quite literally life and death decisions and having a career that not impinges on what you can and can’t do but also on the lives of your family, a good example was Blair’s son being found drunk in Trafalgar Square and giving the police a false name, we are led to believe to protect his father. The papers made a big deal of this but lets be realistic he was a teenager doing normal teenage thing and can you imagine what the policeman would have said when asked for his name and was told ‘Blair’ followed by ‘and what’s your address?’ ‘10 Downing Street’. Apologies for this digression.

I mean we have all got to get real on this, being an MP is not an easy job and whilst I have met many MPs who love their job and have still yet to meet one who has stood to enrich themselves at the expense of the tax pay.

All that being said there is something morally wrong about allowing MPs to claim up to £400 per month on food for their second home without a receipt or £25 on anything else without any paperwork. This would not be accepted in any other walk of life, certainly in business you have to have a receipt for everything, so why are MPs different?

The truth is they are not and the quicker we bring many of the current practices in line with ‘normal’ business practices the better.

So what would I do either require a receipt for everything of increase the basic salary and let out Honourable and Rt Honourable members get on with it.

[Thatcher-right]

In my opinion MPs shouldn't be paid - they should be compensated for "real world" earning that are lost by being MPs .
The difference in earnings before and after entering parliament should be paid - probably with an upper limit.
With regards to expenses - they should be declared and audited as with any business executive.

[Andrew Bradley]

Time to move on Miss Widdecombe as you are. You are out of touch with people who live in the real world and don't have an expenses gravy train.

I was going to suggest a knighthood for Winterton for services to expenses but am too late. Perhaps a peerage when he retires or more hopefully when he is not re-selected by his constiuency association. Not much chance of the latter as no doubt there are too many sycophants in his Cheshire seat who thinks he is the best thing since sliced bread.

[Ed]

"those who can afford not to be recompensed and those whose pay is so low that to them it all looks like something very grand".

A strange perspective. For one thing, £60k or so really is rather a lot of money, well above the average income. I think it's rather insulting to refer to people whose pay is "so low" that they think £60k a lot of money.

Secondly, in an ideal world political jobs would be unpaid. They should not be seen as a career option for thrusting professionals, but as public duties which it is an honour to perform. A paid minister is much less likely to rock the boat than an upaid one, or to resign on principle, because he needs to keep his job.

[RichardJ]

"we deserve to be reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred"

Yes, those plasma screen tvs are vital.

[London Tory]

Widdecombe I can almost comprehend- she condemns the Press yet writes a lucrative column for the Daily Express. Sheer hypocrisy and rank, odious double standards. Widdecombe did enormous damage to a decent man in Michael Howard, and frankly the sooner she retires the better.

David Maclean was the worst Chief Whip in the history of the Conservative Party, and his attitude to expenses and much else sums up why the Major Government- of which he was a member- sunk without the trace.

The Winterton's really are becoming a serious issue for the Conservative Party. Ridiculous pomposity [Nick] and insensitive jokes about minorities [Ann] we will just about put up with, but when you are well over the hill career wise, have absolutely no hope of advancement- ever- under David Cameron- and have an image which will drive away floating voters in droves, surely the time has come for HQ to lean on the Macclesfield and Congleton Associations, and force, if necessary, these two to retire next time.

Conservative Party members who have to campaign in swing seats are not interested in how many pompous speeches Sir Nick has made over the years, before the usual suspect pipes up, we just realise that we have to appeal to voters outside the Cheshire shires, and the Wintertons are a major handicap in this respect.

[grumpy old man]

London Tory @1203. And if the porky pair won't retire - deselect them.

[Adam in London]

My goodness I love Ann Widdecombe - a politician with some balls (so to speak) and tell it like it is.

It's so amusing to see people bleat about how things would be different in the private sector - too right, in the private sector a requirement to permenantly work and effectively live in two locations would be met by upping the salary (but making the addition non-pensionable) - as the Members Estimate Committee Reports points out: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmmemest/578/578i.pdf

[Cleethorpes Rock]

Aren't the Wintertons standing down at the next election anyway? They are an embarrassment to the party- surely there is a way Cameron can diplomatically shuffle them off the scene?

[AlanofEngland]

"When they call the roll in the Senate [Commons], the Senators [Hon Members] do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.'"..Theodore Roosevelt

[sbjme19]

The Wintertons have n't announced they're retiring, as far as I know.
There's a handful of long-serving MPs (one or two Labour members also) who have become "Members of the House of Commons" rather than representatives of a particular party. They love the place and their chairmanships, love the gravy train and wo n't retire. The Tory ones do n't support their leader and are just a complete nuisance.

[David Parker]

Widdecombe, is seldom hesitant to enlist the aid of journalists and the media in her sanctimonious and narrow minded condemnation of everything of which she personally disapproves, so she is in no position to complain when, for a change, she finds herself and her colleagues in the spotlight.

Whilst Widdecombe may consider herself to be above criticism, her complaint that politicians, as a whole, are being unfairly treated by the media reveals not merely arrogance, but also the increasing division between the modern political class and those whom they claim to represent.

[Thomas]

Old Widders, the honest voice of the people, forthright and unafraid! Terror of the sleezers, hammer of leftist frauds. She it was who for the need of purity left the CofE and became a catholic such was her insistence on honesty and godliness. Now we see the defiant harridan shouting down the poor suffering deluded taxpayer who has the temerity to want a reasonable accounting from the biggest bunch of crooks in the country. Changing spots is an old custom of the pond life in the HoC, but the spotless Widders?? How have the mighty fallen, and the weapons of war perished? To whom shall we now turn?

[Robert]

London Tory - when will you grow up and actually focus on something serious, like the lack of half sensible economic policies from your beloved leader! You know obviously know nothing, and continue to demonstrate your ignorance of what goes on in the House. I always felt that, country , constituency and then party come in that order of priority, your attitude reminds me somewhat of certain organisations in the 30s.

[Robert]

Cleethorpes Rock - I have corrected you before on your inaccuracies on several issues, I will remind you to look at facts, not misreporting or inaccuracies before casting your slurs behind a pseudoymn - it is easy to slag people off, but of course you will never have the 'balls' to do it to someone's face.

[Andrew Bradley]

Using the name 'Robert' is hardly giving your full name and is also hiding. Smacks to me of 'kettles' and 'black'

[SimonC]

It is a happy thought that Ms Widdecombe will have left the house soon. This opinion (not to mention her recent voting the Labour line on 42 days and her attack on countryside freedoms) sums up everything wrong with her - since when has getting you employer to buy your furniture been a legitimate expense?

[Adam in London]

Since your job required you to have a second home.