An end to free expenses claims for politicians?

Wednesday 06 August 2014

Jersey's politicians should have to prove their expenses are legitimate, before receiving up to £4,000 a year, tax free. 80% of those who responded to a recent consultation thought the current expense allowance system should be scrapped, as it doesn't even require members to say what they spent the money on.

Momentum is also building to pay States Members more money than their current £46,600 total package, if they take on more responsibility - but that could be done simply by reducing the pay of those that don't. 75% of respondents supported different pay levels for the Island's politicians, with those in ministerial posts receiving a premium.

States Members threw out a proposal to do just that, from Senator Philip Ozouf, back in May, but it is now back on the agenda.

The consultation only received a handful of responses, just 39 members of the public, and nine states members, took the time to give their views. It was run by the States Members Remuneration Review Body (SMRRB), which is chaired by Julian Rogers: "We did not receive a very significant number of responses to our consultation but we were nevertheless impressed by the quality of the responses received and by the amount of thought that respondents had put into their submissions. It was particularly interesting to note that, even though the States voted in May this year against removing the current restriction on having different rates of remuneration for different members, nearly three quarters of respondents thought that this should be the case."

The SMRRB has published a summary of the consultation response, which quotes some of the comments it received. In support of a tighter allowances system, one person said: “There should be no cash allowances for anything which is not proven to have been spent. As self-employed individuals, they should pay for their own parking, telephones and IT provision as do ordinary self-employed people.” 

In support of paying States Members according to what they do, one person commented: “Remuneration of States members should reflect time commitment and responsibility. The current basic fee is too high and the fees paid to ministers, in particular the Chief Minister, are too low. (...) The Chief Minister has a more than full time position with huge responsibilities. Ministers similarly have fully time positions with lesser responsibilities. Ordinary members have very limited responsibilities and given the large numbers their role should be little more than 50% of a full time position, and remunerated accordingly.” 

The SMRRB will tell the States what it thinks needs to change when it completes its report in August, with proposed changes possibly being implemented after the elections in October.