Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Harman (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 23 April 2009. It occurred during Business statement on Business of the House.


Business of the House

If the criteria involve parliamentary duties, duties involving the CPA or the IPU could certainly come within that definition. Obviously, the resolution will need to address these issues and satisfy Members that they will be able to carry out their parliamentary duties. In relation to that, we need to ensure that parliamentary duties are properly defined. As far as the recess is concerned, the proposal is that the new scheme would be introduced in July and that the flat-rate daily payments would depend on the days attended. Because there would be fewer such days between July and 12 October, owing to the recess, there would have to be transitional arrangements. It is easy to think of all the things that are wrong with every proposal. Among the 650 Members of this House there are 650 different views on what would be the best system—in fact, there are probably more, because some people change their mind from day to day. Actually, there is not a perfect system. I hope that we will all try in good faith to establish a system that recognises the extra expense of representing a constituency outside London, while satisfying the public by showing that Members are claiming expenses for coming to Westminster, rather than simply claiming them because their constituency is far away.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
491 c378 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Allowances Members
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk