Money For Old Rope
The Sunday Times ran a great story on the House of Lords the other day in exposing the organised racket that allows peers to earn a handsome living from the public purse - for doing next to nothing.
The laugh is that most of these 'noble' lords are already retired from highly paid jobs and are drawing generous public pensions, so why do they need or want even more money from the public purse?
If the Scottish Parliament can operate with a single chamber, then surely Westminster can do the same and in the process save the country something like £10 billion a year.
Low-key lords clock in, then clean up
The House of Lords: critics have warned the system of payments is too lax (Carl Court)
NEARLY 50 members of the House of Lords picked up attendance payments worth at least £1,000 each last year — despite making no contribution to debates.
The “silent peers” include three, all Labour, who were paid more than £40,000 for attending. They also claimed tens of thousands of pounds in travel costs between them.
The size of payments to peers who do little in the chamber has sparked demands to tighten the system of self-regulation and to revive attempts for wholesale reform of the House of Lords.
Some admit using the Lords for non-parliamentary work. Lord Temple-Morris, who defected from the Conservatives to Labour, said he used his office to write his memoirs, among other work. Another said his Lords work included membership of a group specialising in whisky.
“They are not accountable to anybody,” said Sir Alistair Graham, former chairman of the committee on standards in public life. “Every time something like this comes up, it reminds me how scandalous it is that we have not reformed the House of Lords.”
NEARLY 50 members of the House of Lords picked up attendance payments worth at least £1,000 each last year — despite making no contribution to debates.
The “silent peers” include three, all Labour, who were paid more than £40,000 for attending. They also claimed tens of thousands of pounds in travel costs between them.
The size of payments to peers who do little in the chamber has sparked demands to tighten the system of self-regulation and to revive attempts for wholesale reform of the House of Lords.
Some admit using the Lords for non-parliamentary work. Lord Temple-Morris, who defected from the Conservatives to Labour, said he used his office to write his memoirs, among other work. Another said his Lords work included membership of a group specialising in whisky.
“They are not accountable to anybody,” said Sir Alistair Graham, former chairman of the committee on standards in public life. “Every time something like this comes up, it reminds me how scandalous it is that we have not reformed the House of Lords.”
Lord Elder claimed the most, £40,800 in allowances and £7,353 for travelHe added that peers had shown some willingness to overhaul their payments system recently but, in the absence of full reform of the upper house, “they need to follow through on this issue”.
Analysis of House of Lords payments and speaking and voting records for 2013 shows that 49 peers made no spoken or written contributions in the chamber, while claiming at least £1,000 each. Many of the peers who did not contribute in the chamber did, however, vote on numerous occasions or sit on committees. They must carry out Lords work to claim their allowance. Some had to cut back on their commitments through illness.
The peer who claimed the most was Lord Elder, former general secretary of the Scottish Labour party. He attended on 138 days, claiming £40,800 in allowances and £7,353 for travel. Although he did not speak, he voted 75 times.
Elder said this weekend: “I listened, I voted. I regard that as a reasonable contribution . . . Also last year I was on the committee for Scotland and that took a lot of time.”
Two other peers claimed more than £40,000 in allowances — Lord Cunningham, the former Labour minister, and Lord Temple-Morris.
“I haven’t spoken for some years now because I’ve had health problems and I’ve been told not to get overexcited,” said Temple-Morris, who attended on 136 days and voted 66 times. “I’ve limited it to committee work.
“I am writing a book but I work from the House of Lords really in everything I do.”
Analysis of House of Lords payments and speaking and voting records for 2013 shows that 49 peers made no spoken or written contributions in the chamber, while claiming at least £1,000 each. Many of the peers who did not contribute in the chamber did, however, vote on numerous occasions or sit on committees. They must carry out Lords work to claim their allowance. Some had to cut back on their commitments through illness.
The peer who claimed the most was Lord Elder, former general secretary of the Scottish Labour party. He attended on 138 days, claiming £40,800 in allowances and £7,353 for travel. Although he did not speak, he voted 75 times.
Elder said this weekend: “I listened, I voted. I regard that as a reasonable contribution . . . Also last year I was on the committee for Scotland and that took a lot of time.”
Two other peers claimed more than £40,000 in allowances — Lord Cunningham, the former Labour minister, and Lord Temple-Morris.
“I haven’t spoken for some years now because I’ve had health problems and I’ve been told not to get overexcited,” said Temple-Morris, who attended on 136 days and voted 66 times. “I’ve limited it to committee work.
“I am writing a book but I work from the House of Lords really in everything I do.”
Lord Temple-Morris attended on 136 days and voted 66 times (IAN NICHOLSON)
A Labour source said on Cunningham’s behalf that he had “an average voting record, was previously active on the science and technology committee but stepped down having served his time”.
Baroness Adams, former Labour MP for Paisley North, who attended on 127 days and claimed £38,100, plus £14,152 in travel costs, said there had “been no debates that I have been particularly au fait with”, although she thought this might soon change. Adams, who voted 60 times, also said there were “far too many” peers, which made it difficult to find a slot to speak.
The highest-claiming hereditary peers who did not speak include the Earl of Lindsay. He attended 82 times and claimed £24,000 in allowances.
Lindsay said he had been a “very heavy contributor” to the house since he joined in 1990, even if he had been quiet last year. He added that he worked on some informal parliamentary groups: “The Green Deal, whisky; it’s still quite an active life.”
Lord Evans of Temple Guiting, who did not speak last year but previously did so extensively, is critical of the ex-MPs in the Lords who “speak all the time but say nothing”. He said he carried out Lords outreach work with schoolchildren and was likely to speak more in the future.
Baroness Adams, former Labour MP for Paisley North, who attended on 127 days and claimed £38,100, plus £14,152 in travel costs, said there had “been no debates that I have been particularly au fait with”, although she thought this might soon change. Adams, who voted 60 times, also said there were “far too many” peers, which made it difficult to find a slot to speak.
The highest-claiming hereditary peers who did not speak include the Earl of Lindsay. He attended 82 times and claimed £24,000 in allowances.
Lindsay said he had been a “very heavy contributor” to the house since he joined in 1990, even if he had been quiet last year. He added that he worked on some informal parliamentary groups: “The Green Deal, whisky; it’s still quite an active life.”
Lord Evans of Temple Guiting, who did not speak last year but previously did so extensively, is critical of the ex-MPs in the Lords who “speak all the time but say nothing”. He said he carried out Lords outreach work with schoolchildren and was likely to speak more in the future.
Among peers who claimed the most in attendance payments were Lord Elder, right, and Lord Temple-Morris, far rightCritics have warned that the Lords’ system is too lax. Unlike the Commons, where payments are overseen by the independent parliamentary standards authority, in the upper house peers lodge claims with their own finance department, which checks if they attended when they said they did.
With a few exceptions, such as ministers, peers do not receive salaries. They are entitled to a flat-rate allowance of either £150 or £300 a day — they judge for themselves which of the two figures they are justified in claiming.
The cost of maintaining peers has grown as their numbers have increased almost continuously since the majority of hereditary peers were expelled in 1999, when the head count fell from 1,330 to 666. It has now climbed back to 876, of whom 778 are eligible to take part in the work of the upper house.
In the 2013-14 financial year, peers claimed £18.7m in attendance allowances, up by almost £1m on 2012-13.
A Lords spokesman said: “The House is an active and effective revising chamber and members contribute to that work in a wide variety of ways . . . not limited to speaking in the chamber or tabling a question.”
The Sunday Times Data Team: Stefano Ceccon, Nicola Hughes and Megan Lucero
With a few exceptions, such as ministers, peers do not receive salaries. They are entitled to a flat-rate allowance of either £150 or £300 a day — they judge for themselves which of the two figures they are justified in claiming.
The cost of maintaining peers has grown as their numbers have increased almost continuously since the majority of hereditary peers were expelled in 1999, when the head count fell from 1,330 to 666. It has now climbed back to 876, of whom 778 are eligible to take part in the work of the upper house.
In the 2013-14 financial year, peers claimed £18.7m in attendance allowances, up by almost £1m on 2012-13.
A Lords spokesman said: “The House is an active and effective revising chamber and members contribute to that work in a wide variety of ways . . . not limited to speaking in the chamber or tabling a question.”
The Sunday Times Data Team: Stefano Ceccon, Nicola Hughes and Megan Lucero
