LORDS EXPENSES (Hansard, 6 March 1980)

Earl FERRERS
My Lords, I beg to move the first Motion which stands in my name on the Order Paper. The purpose is to give effect to the secretarial allowance for Ministers and other office holders in your Lordships' House, which was announced in the Statement which my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster made on 14th February and which I repeated here. The new allowance of up to £1,000 per annum is available only to Ministers and other office-holders in your Lordships' House, and is towards the cost of secretarial 404 assistance which is needed to deal with non-departmental correspondence. Those noble Lords will, however, cease to be eligible for the maximum of £700 per annum of Peers' expenses allowances, which they may currently claim. Ministers in another place are entitled to claim towards the cost of secretarial and research assistance and office expenses incurred on constituency business, and also some of the costs of running a home in their constituency. Apart from the £700 a year which can be claimed against the Peers' expenses allowance, noble Lords who hold official offices do not receive any allowance towards similar expenses.
These differences in the treatment of Ministers in each House arise largely out of their constituency responsibilities, which are carried out by a Minister in another place. The review body did not feel able to recommend an allowance which would enable office-holders in this House to meet the costs of maintaining a home outside London. But they did recommend that they should receive some financial help towards the cost of secretarial assistance which is needed to deal with non-departmental correspondence.
The review body, therefore, concluded that expenses up to a maximum of £1,000 a year would be right. I would only re-emphasise that this figure is the maximum against which reimbursement of expenses, which have actually been incurred in employing secretarial assistance to deal with non-departmental correspondence, can be claimed, and that claims against this allowance should be accompanied by receipted vouchers. I beg to move.

§ Lord WELLS-PESTELL
My Lords, I should like to ask the noble Earl the Minister whether he is satisfied that this arrangement, in fact, meets with the approval of the Ministers sitting opposite me at present. Does not it mean that they will lose £700 a year, which did not involve the requirements which the £1,000 will involve? Am I right in thinking that there may be other people in your Lordships' House who are in recept of £700 a year for specific purposes, which they still need, who will not receive one penny under this arrangement?

Earl FERRERS
My Lords, I accept the concern which the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell, has expressed. The best way in which I can explain this to him is as follows. The £700 expenses allowance, which at the moment is allowed, consists of £100 which is tax-free and the rest which is taxable. However, that is the subject of a separate claim and has to be claimed as an expense. Under this system it will be possible to claim, not £700, but £1,000, and it is not impossible that if these are justifiable expenses, accompanied by vouchers, there would be a larger amount which would be free of tax. But that is, of course, a matter for negotiations with the Treasury. However, the £700 allowance, to which the noble Lord refers, is the subject of a special allowance claim and is not part of the salary.

§ Lord WELLS-PESTELL
My Lords, I asked the Minister whether I would be right in thinking that there are some people—not necessarily Ministers—who at present are in receipt of the £700 a year, who will not now receive that. Am right in thinking that that is so?

Earl FERRERS
My Lords, I am not in a position to know what people claim on their allowance forms. In fact, that which is claimed should be claimed because of expenses undertaken. But I certainly take the noble Lord's point, and if he is concerned about it and wishes to discuss it further, I should be quite happy to discuss it with him.