The Courier and Alan Reid's expenses

[Tartan Seer]

What a shame that the Courier did not see fit to question the claims made by Alan Reid in this week's paper.

Rather than rehashing Lib Dem 'MP's expenses one of the lowest in the country' spin as fact, the Courier ought to be treating their readership with respect and asking some of the questions raised by the excellent 'For Argyll' site.

Read it here

http://forargyll.com/2009/05/fact-campb ... -expenses/

[Kintyre Lad]

I think you'll find the For argyll's comments incorrect too. If Argyll can find a harder working MP then I'll be surprised. This man works, eats and sleeps for his constituency. I'm led to believe the sleep bit doesn't come into it.

Regardless of his political stance he works hard for Argyll & Bute. My concern is constant sniping by other political parties and the media will lead to the loss of arguably Argyll's best ever MP.

I'm not sure what For Argyll's point is? OR for that matters yours.

[Tartan Seer]

The point is that anyone reading the Courier's lame article would come away with the impression that Alan Reid's expenses amounted to £16,560 when in fact the top line figure is £133,927.

For Argyll has done all of us a service in drawing attention to Reid's spurious claims, which I suspect reflects Liberal Democrat panic as they see their electoral support crumble in the face of an SNP/Tory battle for this constituency at the next election.

[Ship called Dignity]

which I suspect reflects Liberal Democrat panic as they see their electoral support crumble in the face of an SNP/Tory battle for this constituency at the next election.

Just out of interest do you have support for your claim above? Interesting claim. (genuine question of interest and not loaded honestly! )

I noticed someone had posted Alan's Reid expenses on the forum before but for some reason are now gone. There was an interesting article on this in the Telegraph last week. Did go to highlight how ignorant journalists are to the geography of Argyll. I'd expect Alan Reid to stay in BBs etc in his own constituency.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstop ... enses.html

Alan Reid, the Liberal Democrat MP for Argyll and Bute, put through bills for 30 overnight stays in seaside towns and lochside villages over four years, many during the parliamentary summer recess.

One year the MP was told that he was not allowed to use public funds to pay for hotel rooms within his constituency, but the following year he submitted receipts for further stays in the same places and was paid in full.

According to his files, seen by The Daily Telegraph as part of its investigation into MPs’ expenses, in 2004-05 Mr Reid lived in Dunoon, within his constituency, and did not claim for a second home.

Instead, he used his Additional Costs Allowance to pay for £8,450.09 of hotels, mostly while he stayed in London after working in Westminster.

His bill also included claims, for which he was reimbursed, for overnight stays in 11 B&Bs and hotels in his constituency.

Since then he has designated a house in Cardross, also within his constituency, as his second home and claimed £5,253.90 in mortgage interest payments and £3,551.23 in council tax.

However he has continued to charge taxpayers for his stays in pretty fishing towns within Argyll and Bute. He says his unusual claims are a result of the geography of his constituency which includes several islands and areas which are more easily accessible by ferries than by road.

In 2005-06, he put in receipts for eight nights in Scottish lodgings as part of his £10,702.46 hotel bill that year, including stays in Oban and Loch Fyne. This was rejected by the Commons fees office, which told him: “Cannot claim for hotels in constituency.” His bill was cut by £442.10.

However the following year he stayed in more hostelries, two of which he had visited the previous year, and successfully claimed the cost.

One of the receipts states that he stayed at the B&B with a young woman who is now a Liberal Democrat campaigns officer, although they paid for separate rooms and he did not claim back the cost of hers.

In 2007-08 Mr Reid again claimed for three stays in Scottish hotels including one overlooking Loch Etive and one on the Isle of Bute, 38 miles from his designated second home. These were also paid.

The total cost of the Scottish hotel rooms claimed by Mr Reid between 2004-05 and 2007-08 was £1,580.15, although he only received £1,138.05.

The Green Book, which lays out the rules for MPs, states that they are not meant to claim for hotels in their constituency if they have a home there, or if they also claim mortgage interest payments on a second home.

Overnight stays in their constituency are allowed if MPs finds themselves on parliamentary duties and too far away to get home at night.

Last night Mr Reid said: “Unfortunately, on occasion it is impractical to travel home at night; even within my own constituency due to a lack of ferries. The Fees Office sometimes rejected my claims due to a lack of understanding of the geography of my constituency. I have usually challenged these rejections and any challenge has succeeded.”

He said that he had forgotten to challenge one rejection, that none of the hotels were near his home and that he had only claimed when there was no public transport available.

The night when he stayed with a Lib Dem who worked for him was part of a summer tour of his constituency, he said. They arrived late at night for an early surgery where she took notes.

He said that his designated second home was close enough to Glasgow that he could stay there after late night flights from London.

“This arrangement has been approved by fees officers because of the clause in the Green Book which allows for overnight stays in the constituency whilst on parliamentary business away from the main home if impractical to travel to main home,” he said.

Alan Reid

Job: Lib-Dem Scottish spokesman

Salary: £64,766

Total second home claims

2004-05: £8,546

2005-06: £13,841

2006-07: £15,860

2007-08: £15,489

[Tartan Seer]

It is no secret that local SNP members whilst polling/canvassing have witnessed a collapse in the Lib Dem vote and that support for the SNP has increased significantly since the 07 election.

Alan Reid's expenses are nowhere near the outrageous levels that have been reported elsewhere, and I would expect an MP in such a large and dispersed Constituency as Argyll and Bute to spend at least 30 nights away from home in an average year.

Which makes it all the more disappointing that in a desperate attempt to secure a short term political gain and grab the moral high ground Alan Reid felt it obligatory to spin his expenses. It wasn't necessary and it does him no credit.

[Beachcomber]

I noticed someone had posted Alan's Reid expenses on the forum before but for some reason are now gone.

It was in a thread on Baroness Thatcher: <Link to Message>

[JEM]

Two points to add to this debate:
(or three, as I am not a particular fan of Alan Reid, but I do believe he is a hard-working MP)
1)
I heard the MP from Orkney and Shetland talking on Radio Scotland. He says he DOES have a second home in the constituency. (Which makes the comment on forargyll.com rather suspect).
2)
In an article in the Herald yesterday, the "scandal rating" of Scottish MPs' expenses was rated from 0-5.
Alan Reid was Rated 0/5.

[Tartan Seer]

As far as any 'scandal' is concerned I would be very surprised if this were levelled at Alan Reid.

What is an issue however is Alan Reid's attempt to present his expenses as being less than they actually were, an approach that reflects poorly on him personally and raises the question as to whether, in the wake of the financial scandal stalking Westminster, this is the type of behaviour that is becoming to our local MP.

A number of posters have alluded to Alan Reid's record as a hard working MP, which is laudable as far as it goes, but what Campbeltown and Argyll need is a representative who is not only hard working but is effective. Somebody to put Argyll & Bute on the political map. For all his years in office as our MP, what exactly has Alan Reid achieved?

[Beachcomber]

I can appreciate his need to sometimes stay at hotels and b&bs within Argyll due to the nature and accessibility of some of the further flung areas, but why does he need a second home at Cardross as well as his family home in Dunoon?

Surely the idea behind the second homes allowance is to pay for an MP to have somewhere closer to London where they can stay when at Westminster if the journey home is impractical on a daily basis, not to give them a nest-egg for the future.

Our MSPs' expenses are published on the Scottish Parliament website. I was just flicking through Jim Mather's expenses and noticed he's paying himself 49.3p per mile for using his own car for travelling. I hapen to know that mileage allowances above the Inland Revenue's approved limit of 40p per mile should be declared annually on a form P11D and that the excess is considered a taxable perk.

Firstly, I wonder whether Mr Mather has declared this to the Inland Revenue, and secondly what makes him think that is a reasonable rate to pay himself? How many people reading this are paid anything like that by their employers when they use their own vehicles on company business? Not many, I'll wager.

Perhaps Mr Semple or one of the other councillors would be so kind as to tell us what mileage rate he is allowed to claim?

[Wee Toon Ajax]

I
Our MSPs' expenses are published on the Scottish Parliament website. I was just flicking through Jim Mather's expenses and noticed he's paying himself 49.3p per mile for using his own car for travelling. I hapen to know that mileage allowances above the Inland Revenue's approved limit of 40p per mile should be declared annually on a form P11D and that the excess is considered a taxable perk.

Firstly, I wonder whether Mr Mather has declared this to the Inland Revenue, and secondly what makes him think that is a reasonable rate to pay himself? How many people reading this are paid anything like that by their employers when they use their own vehicles on company business? Not many, I'll wager.

Perhaps Mr Semple or one of the other councillors would be so kind as to tell us what mileage rate he is allowed to claim?

Beachcomber, Mr Mather would not be paying himself 49.3p per mile for using his own car for travelling, instead this is the standard amount that the Scottish parliament allows MSPs to claim as mileage. This can be borne out by checking other MSPs expense claims. So as far as I can see Mr Mather is only claiming what the Scottish Parliament has decided he can claim per mile, not a penny more nor a penny less.

Secondly, if you have idea about P11D forms then you will know that it is not an employee who fills these forms in but the employer on an annual basis and submits them to the tax authorities. In this case, it would be the Finance Department of the Scottish Parliament who would complete these forms for all employees of the Scottish Parliament who earn more than 8,500 pounds and have claimed expenses during the year.

I would suggest before making potentially libellous allegations against people about paying themselves over the odds or not making proper declarations to tax authorities, which is a criminal offence, that you maybe do a bit more research.

[£3.73]

[Beachcomber]

Mr Mather would not be paying himself 49.3p per mile for using his own car for travelling, instead this is the standard amount that the Scottish parliament allows MSPs to claim as mileage.

Oh this is priceless, WTA. You're actually defending MPs and MSPs excessive expense claims.

Secondly, if you have idea about P11D forms then you will know that it is not an employee who fills these forms in but the employer on an annual basis and submits them to the tax authorities.

Quite right. What I meant was that an individual should record these payments on their self-assessment tax return. The P11D is indeed completed by their employer and a copy given to the individual.

There's nothing libelous in my posting. I posed a question and the question still stands. Mr reference to Jim Mather was purely to keep it geographical, and the same question could be asked of any of our elected representatives.

You're just trotting out the same excuse that countless Westminster MPs have used: "It was within the rules so I can't have done anything wrong, can I?"

£3.73 has the better grasp of the issue, I think. Just because they can do something doesn't mean they should do something.

[Wee Toon Ajax]

Mr Mather would not be paying himself 49.3p per mile for using his own car for travelling, instead this is the standard amount that the Scottish parliament allows MSPs to claim as mileage.

Oh this is priceless, WTA. You're actually defending MPs and MSPs excessive expense claims.

Secondly, if you have idea about P11D forms then you will know that it is not an employee who fills these forms in but the employer on an annual basis and submits them to the tax authorities.

Quite right. What I meant was that an individual should record these payments on their self-assessment tax return. The P11D is indeed completed by their employer and a copy given to the individual.

There's nothing libelous in my posting. I posed a question and the question still stands.

You're just trotting out the same excuse that countless Westminster MPs have used: "It was within the rules so I can't have done anything wrong, can I?"

£3.73 has the better grasp of the issue, I think.

I am not defending anybody - I was answering a very badly written initial post by yourself. Reread your initial post please.

Firstly you state that Mr Mathers is paying himself 49.3p - no he wasnt paying himself that - he was claiming what is allowed by the Scottish parliament, whether that amount is regarded as excessive per mile is another thing entirely.

I have worked as an accountant over 20 years now and I have never ever in all that time seen anybody when claiming mileage ask to be paid less than what the local authority / private company or whatever the employer was will pay per mile. People and not just MPS will always accept what they are paid in mileage as they know it is one way they can make a little extra.

In no way I am defending the current situation at Westminster , actually I am utterly disgusted by it - and it is something that has disgusted me over the last 15 years in my own profession - abuse of expenses by people.

But as I say your initial post as far as I can read was badly worded and that was what I was answering too.

[Beachcomber]

I have worked as an accountant over 20 years now...

Why does that come as no surprise?

So come on then, what do you claim in expenses for mileage allowance? I get the Inland Revenue approved maximum of 40p/mile.

If my grammar offends you then I'll try not to lose any sleep over it, but when someone says it's ok for them to receive substantially more than the ordinary man in the street just because the rules say they can, I tend to get a little fiesty.

[WC1]

The Inland Revenue approved maximum of 40p/mile.

is not in fact a maximum at all, and it's wrong of Berachcomber to suggest that it is. It's only the amount above which you pay tax on your mileage allowance if it's more than 40p/mile. Given that the rate was set in 2002 and that fuel, road tax, insurance premiums, etc, etc, were all lower then, arguably it should be revised upwards. If the MPs' rate is 49.3p per mile then Jim Mather is entitled to claim it. He will pay tax on what is deemed to be the 'profit element'.

While some MPs have quite evidently claimed for totally outrageous things, it should not blind us to the basic principle which is that those who represent us at Holyrood or Westminster should not personally have to incur additional costs in order to do so.