Should the MP weekly grocery allowance be higher than dole?

[Magilla]

Doesn't this make it obvious..? I can't see any other meaning..

 

"Subsistence

A flat-rate sum of £25 may be claimed for any night

which a Member spends away from his or her main home

on parliamentary business. No other payment in respect of

subsistence may be claimed "

 

They may be staying with their brother,sister,cousin or in their rented home..they'll get £25 regardless..that's £125 for 5 day week..a lot of groceries..

 

You appear to preclude the possibility that this could also be somewhere that's not their brother,sister,cousin or in their rented home. Regardless, if I went to a conference and stayed with a friend, my employer would still pay for my food.

 

Explain why it's different..

 

Because I don't go to conferences every day, it's a blip, not the norm as in your example.

 

why should I have to pay for my dinner but not MPs.

 

You shouldn't if you're asked to do something as part of your work that would leave you away from home that's beyond the norm.

 

I concede you have a point if they're claiming for food as part of their normal working day.

[nightrider]

They only get grocery allowance when working away from home like you would do in any other job.

.

 

But they are not working away from home because they have two homes! Its totally not the same as when you stay in a hotel and its compensating the extra cost of paying for food in a restaurant.

[truman]

But they are not working away from home because they have two homes! Its totally not the same as when you stay in a hotel and its compensating the extra cost of paying for food in a restaurant.

 

That's my view on it too..

 

---------- Post added 12-12-2012 at 15:14 ----------

 

I concede you have a point if they're claiming for food as part of their normal working day.

 

Thats how I look on them living rent free in London...it's their normal working day...in a hotel it may be different but when they have a house/apartment with a kitchen then they should buy and cook their own...just like everyone else has to...

[Supertramp]

That's my view on it too..

 

---------- Post added 12-12-2012 at 15:14 ----------

 

 

Thats how I look on them living rent free in London...it's their normal working day...in a hotel it may be different but when they have a house/apartment with a kitchen then they should buy and cook their own...just like everyone else has to...

 

I get apartments if I am working away from my location for more than a couple of weeks at a time and I still get £35 a day for food.

[truman]

I get apartments if I am working away from my location for more than a couple of weeks at a time and I still get £35 a day for food.

 

That's nice..are the public paying for it..? To be serious.MP's get their accomodation rent free for the length of their stay in parliament whether it be 5 years or 50 years..you reckon they should be able to feed for free too? In one job I had I lived in a company rented house in Wootton Bassett for a year..I lived rent free but had to pay for my food...

Edited December 12, 2012 by truman

[smiggs]

You seem to be arguing over the 2009/10 expenses scheme, it's 2012 things have moved on. The Green Book is obsolete IPSA run the show now their rules are here

 

The subsistence allowance is for when they have to spend a night in a hotel for parliamentry business (P34 of the above link)

 

MPs may claim for the cost of purchasing food and non- alcoholic drinks where they have necessarily stayed overnight neither in the London Area nor their constituency. This is limited to £25 for each night.

 

This is fairly reasonable. The only time food is mentioned in the document is in relation to subsistence when travelling away from Westminister or their Constituency groceries are not mentioned at all. There are specific allowance for spending on London living and accomodation. The arguement has been had over this and MPs have had a hair cut and it's not before time.

[andygardener]

Doh! Appologies for the mix-up from my previous link It's not covered by the green book anymore. So my above link was the old system which ended in 2010 which as people have pointed out was a bit dodgy if they were claiming for subsistence in their second (taxpayer funded) London home.

 

The new system is now run by IPSA (relevant details here) and only allows claims for receipted food and non-alcoholic drinks to a maximum of £25 when staying outside their constituency and London on Parliamentary business. So they can't claim it in their second (London) home, just when they're in hotels on official business.

 

Which to be honest seems a bit on the tight side if anything, I certainly got a better expenses deal than that 15 years ago (in real terms) in a not particularly senior role in a relatively small company.

[Glennis]

The thing is though, there is an assumption that it's "their" food, whereas the reality is it's probably food for hospitality as part of their job.

 

Unfortunately you didn't include a link to clarify what the allowance was actually for.

 

I'd wager most people would change their tune if their job entailed taking people out to lunch and they were expected to pay for that lunch out of their own pocket.

 

(I didn't vote in the poll).

 

I am sure the canteen and bar in the House of Commons is heavily subsidised

[Supertramp]

That's nice..are the public paying for it..?

 

In the end, yes it is.

[truman]

Doh! Appologies for the mix-up from my previous link It's not covered by the green book anymore. So my above link was the old system which ended in 2010 which as people have pointed out was a bit dodgy if they were claiming for subsistence in their second (taxpayer funded) London home.

 

The new system is now run by IPSA (relevant details here) and only allows claims for receipted food and non-alcoholic drinks to a maximum of £25 when staying outside their constituency and London on Parliamentary business. So they can't claim it in their second (London) home, just when they're in hotels on official business.

 

Which to be honest seems a bit on the tight side if anything, I certainly got a better expenses deal than that 15 years ago (in real terms) in a not particularly senior role in a relatively small company.

 

If those are the rules now then it's not a problem..it was if they were able to claim for food while actually living in London.. end of this debate then now is it?

 

---------- Post added 12-12-2012 at 15:34 ----------

 

In the end, yes it is.

 

As we pay for everything really...at least we can choose which companies' goods we buy..if the price is too high we can shop around..can't do that with taxes...