Consideration of IPSA's Estimate 2010-11
SCIPSA 13
Letter to the Speaker’s Committee for IPSA from the Interim Chief Executive, IPSA
SHORT MONEY AND TRAVEL FOR OPPOSITION SPOKESPERSONS
At the most recent meeting of the Speaker’s Committee, the concern was raised with us that the IPSA Expenses Scheme does not provide sufficient budgets to enable opposition frontbenchers to travel on shadow ministerial business. This has previously been raised with us by Edward Garnier QC MP. I undertook to look into this, and write both to him and also to you to confirm our position on shadow ministerial travel.
Short Money is governed by the Resolution of the House of Commons of 26 May 1999. That Resolution states that it may be used for the purpose of "...financial assistance towards travelling and associated expenses necessarily incurred by an opposition party's spokesmen in relation to the party's parliamentary business".
We do not believe it is appropriate that there should be two calls on the public purse for the same expenditure. Consequently, given that Parliament has resolved that alternative arrangements should be in place, IPSA’s scheme has not been designed to meet the cost of shadow ministerial travel. This is analogous to the similar decision not to meet the costs of ministerial travel or Select Committee travel, for both of which there are alternative sources of funding in place.
This position was set out in the guidance on our rules which we published prior to the general election; at paragraph 7.2 there is guidance on the definition of "extended UK travel that can be justified to IPSA", and this specifically excludes travel on shadow ministerial business.
I recognise that there is concern that the volume of Short Money available is insufficient. However, we regard this as a matter for the House, rather than IPSA, to ensure that the level of funding available meets the stated purpose of the 1999 Resolution.
I remain, of course, happy to discuss this with you and with your parliamentary colleagues.
I have copied this letter to Mr Garnier, who raised the initial query about this issue, to the secretary of the Speaker’s Committee, and to the Speaker, for his information.
8 July 2010
|