Conclusions and recommendations
Parliament faces many challenges and Members recognise
they have a duty to uphold and strengthen the democratic foundation
of our society. Public expectation of Members has grown and the
weight and complexity of the parliamentary workload has increased
significantly.
The Members Estimate Committee believes change is
vital if we are to make Westminster a fit institution for the
21st century. In carrying out this root and branch review the
Committee has been driven by two key objectives: the need to equip
and support Members to carry out their responsibilities in a professional
and effective manner and desire to meet public expectations for
clearer audit and transparency. We were also determined to propose
a system that will endure.
Our investigation of the current system of allowances
has been thorough. We have explored best practice in the public,
private and voluntary sectors and we have consulted widely with
Members as well as organisations and individuals who have both
experience and interest in providing effective solutions for the
issues we have identified.
Our over-riding conclusion is that we must introduce
a robust system of scrutiny for parliamentary allowances as a
matter of urgency in order to build public confidence. We have
also proposed a range of significant reforms for individual allowances—particularly
those relating to accommodation and staffing.
In almost all cases we have made specific recommendations
but we recognise that there is a spread of views on the way that
reimbursing Members for living costs should be dealt with and
we have set out alternative options for reforming the Additional
Costs Allowance for the House to debate and arrive at a final
judgement.
The conclusions and recommendations of this review
do not make life easy for individual Members but we believe they
will play a key role in strengthening and upholding the democratic
institution in which we are proud to work as well as building
the trust and confidence of the people we are elected to represent.
Audit and assurance
1. We recommend that there should be a robust
new system of practice assurance involving regular financial health
checks on records kept and processes used in Members' offices
with outside professional teams covering about 25% of Members
each year and every Member each Parliament. (Paragraph 63)
2. We recommend that the House extends the scope
of the audit engagement so that it is the same as for other public
bodies. The NAO expects that their sampling of claims paid will
include one or more transactions relating to at least 20 per cent
of MPs each year. (Paragraph 68)
3. We recommend that, from the start of the 2009-10
financial year, the receipt threshold should be reduced from £25
to zero and that all claims, however small, will have to be backed
by receipts. (Paragraph 47)
4. We recommend that the Green Book (setting
out the rules on allowances for Members) be revised to specify
more detailed rules and that the new version be brought into effect
by 1 April 2009. (Paragraph 71)
5. We recommend that, for payments from the staffing
allowance, it should be mandatory for Members to deposit staff
contracts and job descriptions with the Department of Resources
and that this should be rigorously enforced. (Paragraph 103)
Scope of overnight expenses
6. We recommend that, with immediate effect,
Members should no longer be able to claim reimbursement for furniture
and household goods or for capital improvements. (Paragraph 215)
7. We recommend that new MPs elected to the next
Parliament to represent constituencies in outer London should
be eligible to claim half of any overnight expenses allowance;
and all MPs representing those seats should be restricted to claim
half the standard rate from the start of the following Parliament.
(Paragraph 229)
Constituency offices
8. We recommend acceptance of the SSRB proposal
that constituency office lease or rental should be met in full
by the House recognising that in some constituencies office costs
are higher than can reasonably be met out of the current Incidental
Expenses Provision; that this should be limited in size and standard
under detailed criteria to be drawn up by an independent chartered
surveyor; that the scheme be run under the guidance of such a
surveyor employed by the House; that the scheme be phased-in over
a period of time; and that Members who choose not to make use
of the new scheme can continue to claim for constituency office
costs under the Incidental Expenses Provision or its successor.
(Paragraph 130)
Communications
9. We recommend that the rules governing the
Communications Allowance be tightened in respect of not publishing
during election periods, not using party logos or other distinguishing
labels, confining distribution to Members' own constituencies
and other matters; and that claims for the costs of production
of any publication costing more than £1,000 will only be
met if it has been cleared in advance with the Department of Resources.
(Paragraph 141)
10. We recommend that the Communications Allowance
itself be frozen at the current level for three years from April
2009 till April 2012 and thereafter the uprating formula be changed
to RPIX. (Paragraph 142)
Travel
11. We recommend that the House should continue
to apply the same car mileage rate as specified by HM Revenue
& Customs. (Paragraph 160)
12. We recommend that the current figure of 350
miles per month which may be claimed without supporting documents
be replaced by separate mileage limits for small, medium-sized
and large constituencies. (Paragraph 164)
Overnight expenses
13. We recommend that the Additional Costs Allowance
be adapted into an overnight expenses allowance, comprising a
£19,600 maximum budget for accommodation (excluding furniture,
household goods and capital improvements) but operating on the
basis of itemised reimbursement and a flat rate of £30 for
daily subsistence. (Paragraph 225)
14. We recommend that, instead of the London
Supplement (which Sir John Baker recommended should be increased
to £3,623), the extra living costs and working unsociable
hours in London should be reflected in a new London costs allowance
consolidated into a taxable amount of £7,500 for MPs who
do not or are not eligible to claim the Additional Costs Allowance.
(Paragraph 234)
Resettlement
15. We recommend that, in the next Parliament,
the basis of calculation of the Resettlement Grant should be shifted
towards Members leaving the House in their early fifties. (Paragraph
253)
Other SSRB recommendations
16. We recommend that the SSRB proposal that
Incidental Expenses Provision should be abated for every work
station in London should not be implemented. (Paragraph 109)
17. We recommend that no further steps should
be taken to implement the SSRB proposal for a further increase
in the Staffing Allowance for each full-time equivalent member
of staff based in London. (Paragraph 110)
18. We recommend that the SSRB's proposal that
partners of Members should be entitled to the same limited travel
arrangements as spouses and civil partners should not be implemented.
(Paragraph 171)
| 
