Monday, 18 May 2009


Unlike Dr Steve, who displays a breakdown on his site for the nosey to look at, Roger's site just shows the totals of Additional Costs Allowance (ACA) or second home allowances, without any breakdown and is rather boring.
What however, is significant, is that as his circumstances have changed, he has reduced his ACA appropriately and I hope will be seen to have been behaving in a manner that will commend itself to the North Thanet Conservative Party and his electorate, unlike too many of his Westminster colleagues.
A modest series of ACA claims has been the situation since 2005/6 since the high of 2002/3, as the table below shows:
2007/8 : £ 9,375.00
2006/7 : £ 9,197.00
2005/6 : £ 7,368.00
2004/5 : £14, 873.00
2003/4 : £ 16,293.00
2002/3 : £ 19,558.00
We should also be aware that Roger has been ahead of the Commons Speaker for some time on the need to reform the unacceptable state of MP's expenses. Here is an extract from Gale's view of July last year:
Gale’s View - 9.7.2008.
"I have for years believed that the existing system of parliamentary pay and allowances, widely misunderstood by the public, deliberately misrepresented by the press and exploited by a few has been long overdue for reform. Sadly, last week’s vote in the House of Commons is unlikely to put the matter to rest........".
Prophetic words from a principled and experienced MP.
Rumour has it that he stopped the nonsense being proposed by Cllr Ezekiel to accept political donations from CGP for Thanet North and South Conservatives a while ago. It is a pity that too few Conservative Councillors had the same high principles as their local MP, when it came to selecting their own Council Group Leader.


Anonymous said...

Bertie. Been following yours and ECR blog for a while now. A better source of info than the local news/press. I want some advice if your willing. M.

Jeeva said...

"Prophetic words from a principled and experienced MP."

Or, as I'd put it...

Prophetic words from a principled but utterly useless MP.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps a question as to his office expenses might be revealing as, I understand, his office is part-time and manned by his wife.

Rumour has it he pays her well above the going rate whereas Dr. Ladyman has a full-time office with 2.5 staff and his office expenses are modest compared to some (yes, I know his wife runs the office but having been there I've seen how busy it is).

Bertie Biggles said...

14:13: M, the best way to contact me is to leave a comment with how I can be of assistance and a contact number. I will not put it upbut will then contact you. A good aspect of 'Comment Moderation'.

16.03, Ouch!

16.55, Roger has his office expenses on view on his web-site. I have restricted interest to ACA as office expenses unless they are a 'Conway', are another issue.

Anonymous said...

Mr Gale has his TOTAL office expenses on his site, but the area of sensitivity - which arose well before the current, wider expenses scandal - is his employment of a family member.

How much is paid to the family member - his wife - is not publicly available, nor do we know whether or not there was a competition for the post she occupies. Mr Gale has steadfastly refused to answer these questions.

It is a common practice for MPs (of all Parties) to employ family members. Some, like Tory Mr Conway, have broken the rules in doing so. Whatever, there is a growing consensus, embraced by Tory Leader Cameron, I believe, that it is a practice that shopuld stop. I agree.

Mr Gale should - until it is stopped - disclose how much his wife is paid, whether there was any competition for the post, and whether any other family members benefit, directly or indirectly, from his work as an MP. That would be transparency.

Anonymous said...

An interesting matter of how do you advertise the job and comply with the employment act?