In the light of the British scandals, our TDs and Senators should check their expenses
BRITISH POLITICS is being convulsed through the exposure by the Daily Telegraph of the misuse of an expense provision designed to assist MPs from outside London who need accommodation when attending parliament.
Some cases of fraud in respect of mortgage payments have been exposed, and many other cases have emerged involving inappropriate or extravagant use of this provision, the operation of which was not adequately monitored by those officials charged with supervising it.
A number of MPs of both main parties have had to announce that they will not stand again at the next election, and several Labour ministers have resigned – at least one of them in a manner designed to damage the prime minister Gordon Brown, whose continuance in office may now be challenged by members of his own party mainly for reasons unrelated to this issue
This British political crisis has been greatly aggravated by the fact that this data, published as a result of a leak, was to have been officially released last year but was held up for many months. Some have suggested this delay may have been connected with an effort to obscure some of the inconvenient facts.
It would be naive to imagine that newspapers here will not be tempted to emulate the Daily Telegraph’s coup, which has significantly increased its flagging circulation.
It may well be the case that our parliamentary expense arrangements are less vulnerable to abuse than the British system, but even if this proves to be the case these dramatic events are likely to lead to further publicity here for other aspects of what has become a generous remuneration and expenses regime for TDs and Senators.
It would, therefore, be wise for our politicians, as soon as they have recovered from this weekend’s multiple elections, to promptly review their financial arrangements to eliminate any aspects of present arrangements that might give rise to public hostility if publicised by the media.
One issue that may arise in this connection is the use of subsistence allowances in respect of attendance at the Oireachtas.
It has already been suggested that some members claim such expenses even when staying without cost with relatives or friends.
At present there does not seem to be any process of checking whether this is the case, ie by requiring the furnishing of hotel or guesthouse bills or apartment rental details.
If evidence were to emerge of actual abuse of this kind this could be very damaging not only to the individuals concerned but also to the parties to which they belong and to politics generally.
I have always been inclined to prefer a system of vouched expenses, but these would need to be constrained within some maximum: those claiming them might otherwise be tempted to stay in five-star hotels.
Another area where abuse is possible is in respect of travel to and from the Oireachtas.
The mileage rates to which TDs have been entitled to have been Civil Service mileage rates, which, in my view, have always been set at a high level. The recent decision to cut these rates by 25 per cent was a belated recognition of this.
There remains the further problem of possible abuse of this car-mileage system by members of the Oireachtas travelling by train yet claiming the car mileage allowance.
I raised this issue six years ago in a book of essays on the Irish State*, where I pointed out that at that time the Dublin-Cork return car mileage rate for an Oireachtas member was €355.23, whereas the return rail fare was €62.70 first class or €44.40 standard class.
So, a TD or Senator travelling by train for 90 sessions of the Dáil (never mind committee meetings) could have secured an extra €28,000 a year tax-free, and in the absence of any checks on his actual travel method he or she could have been reasonably certain of getting away with such fraud. By sharing a car with a colleague and taking turns, with both claiming mileage allowances such public representatives could also have saved €14,000 a year free of tax.
In a country where there has always been considerable tolerance for fiddles of this kind, it is unfair to subject public representatives to such blatant temptation.
And in so far as any of our TDs or Senators may in the past have succumbed to such a temptation, they could scarcely have been expected then to take a tough line with tax-evaders or social welfare fraudsters.
The whole fabric of public honesty can be undermined by ill-judged arrangements of this kind. It would be wise for the Oireachtas to delegate the future determination of politicians’ pay and expenses to a small committee comprising outsiders of integrity and common sense.
Such a body might also be asked to tackle the present flagrant abuse involved in the appointment of close relatives as political aides, to be paid by the State. This kind of behaviour is totally inappropriate in a modern European state.
If the Government fails to act promptly on these matters after these elections it will be open to the Opposition parties to announce they will include such a reform in their programmes for the next general election. That could increase their already impressive electoral advantage.
It is urgent for politicians to safeguard themselves and our political system from possible fallout arising out of the current British parliamentary scandals.
*Reflections on the Irish State, by Garret FitzGerald. Irish Academic Press, price €30
