Simon Dickson, principal consultant at Puffbox, writes stuff about e-government, online news and politics. Some important people read it.

MPs to lose Communications Allowance

4 November 2009 , , ,

Among the Kelly Report's recommendations for reforming MPs' expenses and allowances is the abolition of the £10,000 annual Communications Allowance. And quite right too. The report states:

8.20 The Committee believes that effective engagement between an MP and his or her constituents is of the utmost importance, particularly in the wake of recent events. The Committee’s survey research shows that the public expect MPs to keep in touch with what they think is important and to explain their actions and decisions.

8.21 However, with some commendable exceptions, the evidence that the communications allowance has really succeeded in promoting more effective engagement is very limited, even allowing for the relatively short time since its introduction. There is much more evidence of it being used in ways that are essentially party political or have more to do with self-promotion. It is also difficult to police.

8.22 For these reasons, the Committee has concluded that the allowance should be abolished.

It'll only save between £2m (assuming some of the expenditure finds its way into other allowances) and £5m, a relatively minor sum. But I'm not at all surprised to read:

The Committee has been shown some good examples of the communications allowance being used  to engage with constituents in ways which appear to be both valuable and appropriate. However, the Committee has seen much more evidence of the allowance being used to fund material which is largely self-promotional, containing little information about local issues but a large number of photographs of the MP, or which mainly recites party lines.

I recently received a richly-designed mailing from my own Conservative MP. Lots of colour photos. Official Conservative colours and fonts. It may not have mentioned the word Conservative, but there was no doubt which party it came from. If it's the last one I receive... actually, let me rephrase that. If it's the last one I pay for myself, I won't be sorry.

The lesson here, surely, is that you can't sensibly separate party politics and Westminster business. I'm glad the Committee recognises this. As I've written here before (eg around McBride), the implications of such a conclusion go well beyond the few million quid we'll all save.

PS: The Committee also appears to have added a new definition of greater London, based on a 'reasonable commuting distance'. It calls for the new independent regulator to draw up a list of constituencies to add to those which meet the current rule: 'constituencies wholly within 20 miles of Westminster'. The BBC specifically names Reigate, Slough, Runnymede and Weighbridge, St Albans, Welwyn and Hatfield, Epping Forest, Sevenoaks, Maidenhead, Broxbourne, Mole Valley, Windsor and Dartford.

  • Why does the link to you in the FCO site sidebar still go to your old blog?

    Why didn't the Committee publicise what it thought were examples of good practice?

Stop wasting your time RSS feed

Let us tell you when there's new stuff to read at puffbox.com, by subscribing to the RSS feed.

Go on, show your face

If you want your photo to appear beside any comments you leave here, hop over to Gravatar and upload a picture of yourself. Otherwise, we'll just assume the machine-generated monster is a fair likeness.

Tag cloud

Puffbox.com archives

Search

Alan's comments feed

By popular demand: the comments feed

Ancient history

For posts during 2006 or 2007, Simon's old blog's archives are still available.