January 30, 2008
Derek Conway, as practically everyone in the country now knows, is the Conservative MP for Old Bexley and Sidcup - although now that the Tory whip has been withdrawn, it may be more accurate to describe him as an independent! One little matter that the media, in probing certain aspects of his parliamentary allowances and expenses claiming activities, appear to have overlooked is that of his remarkable record in claiming Parliament’s Additional Costs Allowance (ACA).
According to the published figures the Honourable Member claimed £22,060 (2006/7), £21,634 (2005/6), £20,902 (2004/5), £20,333 (2003/4), £19,722 (2002/3) and £18,009 (2001/2) - making a grand total of £122,660 claimed in just six years!
We should stress at this point that this is all perfectly legal of course. But, we have to ask, why does the Honourable Member NEED to claim any ACA at all?
We’ll explain. ACA was originally set up to reimburse the expenditure incurred by MPs representing constituencies so remote from The House that daily commuting was not a viable option; meaning that such MPs have no choice but to pay out for their bed and board whilst attending Parliament.
The creation of this provision, for that purpose, is reasonable in our opinion.
But the problem is that Parliament has not set any criteria - meaning that any MP - except those representing INNER LONDON constituencies - can claim it; relying on the Honourable members to be - well - honourable, by not abusing the privilege.
Typically MPs claiming this money use it to allay expenses in the renting and purchase of accommodation in central London, so as to be within easy commuting distance of The House.
Parliamentary regulations allow them to claim their rent, mortgage interest, council tax, phone, gas, electricity, water, decorating, security and grocery bills under this allowance.
And, of course, should MPs use this allowance to purchase and maintain a London property, then the rules also allow them to sell the property at a later date and to pocket the entire capital gains profit made through its sale - which could be truly considerable in London’s booming property market. Of course, we are not suggesting that the Honourable Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup would engage in such practice.
But whereas we can understand why someone representing a Scottish or north of England constituency would be justified in claiming this allowance, we are unable to understand why the Honourable Member, who represents Old Bexley and Sidcup in southeast London, would need to do so.
After all, according to the RAC Route Finder facility, the distance by road, from central Sidcup to The House, is around a mere 12 miles!
In addition it is a journey undertaken by hundreds, if not thousands, of commuters each and every working day. And it’s not that Sidcup is badly served by rail either. According to the official timetables there is a frequent and fast service between Sidcup for Waterloo East (just across the Thames from The House).
For instance, tomorrow morning:
The 07:31 service from Sidcup arrives at Waterloo at 07:58 - a journey time of 27 minutes.
The 07:47 service from Sidcup arrives at Waterloo at 08:08 - a journey time of 21 minutes.
The 07:51 service from Sidcup arrives at Waterloo at 08:19 - a journey time of 28 minutes.
The 08:05 service from Sidcup arrives at Waterloo at 08:29 - a journey time of 24 minutes, etc etc.
Our point being that the service between Sidcup and Waterloo is both frequent and fast in both directions! Hence, we ask the obvious question: Why has the Honourable Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup claimed over £122,000 in taxpayers’ money in just six years? Perhaps he’ll tell us?
Full details of the Honourable Member’s allowance and expenses claiming may be found here.
According to the published figures the Honourable Member claimed £22,060 (2006/7), £21,634 (2005/6), £20,902 (2004/5), £20,333 (2003/4), £19,722 (2002/3) and £18,009 (2001/2) - making a grand total of £122,660 claimed in just six years!
We should stress at this point that this is all perfectly legal of course. But, we have to ask, why does the Honourable Member NEED to claim any ACA at all?
We’ll explain. ACA was originally set up to reimburse the expenditure incurred by MPs representing constituencies so remote from The House that daily commuting was not a viable option; meaning that such MPs have no choice but to pay out for their bed and board whilst attending Parliament.
The creation of this provision, for that purpose, is reasonable in our opinion.
But the problem is that Parliament has not set any criteria - meaning that any MP - except those representing INNER LONDON constituencies - can claim it; relying on the Honourable members to be - well - honourable, by not abusing the privilege.
Typically MPs claiming this money use it to allay expenses in the renting and purchase of accommodation in central London, so as to be within easy commuting distance of The House.
Parliamentary regulations allow them to claim their rent, mortgage interest, council tax, phone, gas, electricity, water, decorating, security and grocery bills under this allowance.
And, of course, should MPs use this allowance to purchase and maintain a London property, then the rules also allow them to sell the property at a later date and to pocket the entire capital gains profit made through its sale - which could be truly considerable in London’s booming property market. Of course, we are not suggesting that the Honourable Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup would engage in such practice.
But whereas we can understand why someone representing a Scottish or north of England constituency would be justified in claiming this allowance, we are unable to understand why the Honourable Member, who represents Old Bexley and Sidcup in southeast London, would need to do so.
After all, according to the RAC Route Finder facility, the distance by road, from central Sidcup to The House, is around a mere 12 miles!
In addition it is a journey undertaken by hundreds, if not thousands, of commuters each and every working day. And it’s not that Sidcup is badly served by rail either. According to the official timetables there is a frequent and fast service between Sidcup for Waterloo East (just across the Thames from The House).
For instance, tomorrow morning:
The 07:31 service from Sidcup arrives at Waterloo at 07:58 - a journey time of 27 minutes.
The 07:47 service from Sidcup arrives at Waterloo at 08:08 - a journey time of 21 minutes.
The 07:51 service from Sidcup arrives at Waterloo at 08:19 - a journey time of 28 minutes.
The 08:05 service from Sidcup arrives at Waterloo at 08:29 - a journey time of 24 minutes, etc etc.
Our point being that the service between Sidcup and Waterloo is both frequent and fast in both directions! Hence, we ask the obvious question: Why has the Honourable Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup claimed over £122,000 in taxpayers’ money in just six years? Perhaps he’ll tell us?
Full details of the Honourable Member’s allowance and expenses claiming may be found here.
No comments:
Post a Comment