Making Parliament transparent – 20 April 2007

Simon Hughes andNorman Baker (MP for Lewes) led the way in defeating an attempt to exempt Parliament from the Freedom of Information Act over two years ago.

Speaking in the debate, Simon Hughes said:

“I hope the House will make it clear that we support retaining the freedom of information provisions on public authorities that govern the House of Commons and the House of Lords, and that we can make sure that everything that we do financially is as accountable as in any other public body.”

Warning a Conservative MP about the impact of his proposed change to the law Simon Hughes said:

“It would be extremely bad politics, as well as extremely bad law, for us to seek at this stage, when Parliament is hardly the most well-regarded institution in the land, to exempt the House of Commons or the House of Lords, or both, from the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.”

“At the very moment when we were trying to establish that we were doing a decent job for our constituents, the Bill would have the direct consequence of exempting information on how we spend our money, what contracts we place and our expenses, unless we voluntarily agreed to provide it…. This position is completely unacceptable.”

To read more from the debate please click on this link: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2007-04-20b.551.3&s=expenses+speaker%3A10298#g600.1

On MPs pay 3 July 2008

On the same day Simon Hughes also called the system in which MPs decide on their own pay “a nonsense”:

“We are now having the debate that we all knew we had to have, and I take a very simple view on this matter…. We have had this nonsense year after year for all the time that I have been in this place —25 years, the same length of time as the Leader of the House. We are now rightly saying, "Let's stop this annual game of trying to work out what we think we can get away with in our pay increase. Let's have an independent system." That has been agreed, which is a blessed relief.”

Calling on the government to make this system completely independent he went on:

“Let me put this point directly to the Government, as there is no other way of putting it. Of course, Governments have a pay policy and will always have a pay policy, but we cannot predict what it is going to be. Some of us have taken the consistent position that if we ask for independent advice about public sector pay, we should follow it—whether it be for nurses, the police or whatever. There is no logic in taking one view and then not adopting the same view for ourselves.”

Click here to read more: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-07-03b.1061.0&s=pay+transparent+speaker%3A10298#g1068.3

Members' Expenses debate – 3 July 2008

On 3 July, Simon Hughes made clear his view about the need to clean up the system:

“It is also right that we end the absolutely disgraceful way in which, under the current arrangements, colleagues from outer London have been able to take full advantage not only of their own home, but of a second home at the same rate, even though in some cases they have lived only a matter of 20, 30 or 45 minutes away from here. We have to be very clear about those things.”

He also argued against a Conservative MP’s attempt to reduce the transparency of MPs expenses warning that reducing the transparency of the House of Commons would be a “shameful day”:

“I support with enthusiasm the proposal from the Members Estimate Committee, and I hope that the House listens very clearly to the warnings that my hon. Friend Nick Harvey and Mrs. May gave, because unless we are robust on the issue, and unless the amendment in the name of Mr. Touhig is defeated, we will undermine all the work that people have been trying to do to ensure that we are seen to be absolutely transparent in our practices. It is completely unacceptable to propose, as the amendment does, an audit only for the additional costs allowance, rather than a full audit of all that we do with public money. It is completely unacceptable, and if the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues win the vote, it will be a shameful day.”

Please click here to read more:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-07-03b.1095.0&s=transparent+pay+speaker%3A10298#g1111.1

Members' Allowances debate – 16 July 2008

Speaking at a debate on MPs allowances last summer Simon Hughes was very clear that Liberal Democrat MPs would lead the way in publishing their expenses.

“We will have spot checks for all Liberal Democrat MPs. We will have independent auditing of our expenses. Every one of our shadow Cabinet members will publish all their expenses. Ours will be published by next Tuesday so that people can look at them, and they will be published on a regular basis thereafter. That is the right thing. There may be questions, but at least everyone will be able to see the facts.”

“We are committed to declarations by everyone who is elected as to whether they are a member of the parliamentary pension scheme, whom they employ as assistants and whether they are members of their family, and the band of payment within €10,000 bands; nothing being used to cover personal expenses, or to finance subsidies or gifts of a political nature; annual accounting of the allowance; certified independent certification of all the expenditure; annual publication by everyone of everything that they spend; proper contracts; publication on the website, with the consent of staff, of those who work for them; publication of all the service providers; subsistence allowance claims to be published on the website; and generally, complete transparency.”

To read more from the debate please click here: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-07-16d.255.1&s=expenses+speaker%3A10298#g279.0