MPs expenses
July 30th, 2009 at 7:07 pm by David FarrarThe full list for MPs is here and Ministers here. First of all let’s look at overall expenses and Labour have helpfully done a combined ranked list on their blog.
Ministers take up the top ten places ranging from Foreign Minister McCully at $353,000 to Justice Minister Power on $125,000. This is for first six months of this year.
The top ranked non Minister is Phil Goff on $124,000. I actually defended him on Radio NZ. The Opposition Leader gets a huge number of invites – second only to the PM probably. I’ve worked for three of them, and know. And part of their job is to get around the country and meet people and groups. You don’t want a potential PM who spends all their time in Parliament.
The next non Minister is Chris Carter on $82,000. He is Shadow Foreign Minister so again no surprise.
Maurice Williamson has the least expenses as a Minister at $58,000. They do not reveal what Richard Worth’s expenses were before he resigned.
The least expensive MP was Katrina Shanks on $10,000. Katrina is Wellington based.
I would caution against assuming that the cheaper the MP the better. Often it will be that an MP with high domestic travel expenses is very hard working and attends a huge number of meetings and events. While if you sit in the Beehive bar every night, you will have very few travel expenses.
Publishing the expenses is a good thing though, as it does provide an incentive for an MP to consider if a trip is value for money. In other words if it costs $1,000 to attend a meeting, is it worth it?
I’ve yet to meet any regular traveller who actually enjoys it. I doubt any MP really enjoys spendings hours taxing to airports, going through security scanners and getting crammed onto planes. I fly a few times a month and I would do anything to avoid it, if it were not for the fact I can’t get to Auckland by teleportation.
Most of the levels of expenses are around what I would expect. However I would say some List MPs have expenses higher than what I would expect, and I’ll be interested to see their spending levels in future reports.
I have blogged previously on the Wellington accom allowance. This is capped at $24,000 a year so the maximum for six months should be $12,000. Kevin Hague has $12,000 as did Phil Twyford and Melissa Lee. Lockwood Smith is at $12,000 also which puzzles me because he stays in the Speaker’s Flat. Maybe they charge that out at $24,000 a year to record the value of it?
Congrats to the Speaker and PM for releasing the information, and all the parties for agreeing to it.
July 30th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
That’s alot of air and surface travel for the Greens.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
How much of Goff’s expenses were incurred during the lead up to the My Albert by-election?
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
How come Roger Douglas is clocking up big money? He’s supposed to be against government spending!
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Perks claimed by ex MPs should also be listed.
[DPF: I agree]
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
“How come Roger Douglas is clocking up big money? He’s supposed to be against government spending!”
Sir Roger is also against the 39% income tax rate but he still complies with it. Are you suggesting he should not?
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
My MP is sandwiched between Clare Curran and Catherine Delahunty, which is a frightening prospect in any situation.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
Good old roger Douglas and parliamentary spending right??
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 7:56 pm
Goff racked up $79,027 in surface travel, as well as his airfares. That’s around $400 bucks a day.
Does he get around town in an M1 tank or a hovercraft or something?
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
Goff’s surface travel seems very high. And when one considers that Darren Hughes (see Whale Oil post) seems to have access to Crown limos I just wonder whether Goff allows his MPs to use the Crown limo. But the accom allowance seems reasonable at about $400/pw which is not very high. I think our MPs compare pretty well with what is going on in the UK and may be a model for them to follow.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
What are they spending all this money on???
As someone who does a helluva lot of travel at the top-end, I cannot see how they are spending so much.
Since Jan this year, I have been to China 3 times, Korea once, Japan once Singapore twice, UK once, Canada once, Chile once and Australia twice. All fights in business class, except the 2 to OZ. Approx 110 nights in hotels, at least 4 star, but mostly 5 star, have to stay in one low rent hotel in the south of Korea for a couple of nights. Eat like a king and entertain lots of others – I’m in oil and gas and we know how to party and spend money. Plenty of taxis to boot.
All for ~125k. I know what I get up to and what I spend the money on, so when I am questioning some of this, there are some problems…..
Iv’e got no problems with the big spenders like McCully, Groser and Key, but how the fuck does Pansy Wong justify 114k???? 47k on taxis / ground travel!!
And I bet I put in a damn site more hours and effort than most of them.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Yeah OK I think your analysis is sound but Douglas FFS he has argued against an entitlement culture yet was on the news tonight arguing his right to it because Michael Cullen and Helen Clark are entitled to it due to public service and time spent in public service, sucking on the state nipple. I suspect if I pointed out to my current employer or previous employers ( 2 )
Vote:all whom I have a good relationship with that they owe me subsidised holidays for life they would fucking laugh there heads off. Sir Roger Douglas send back the Knighthood you are a total hypercrite. Chris Carter well maybe but I doubt it he won’t say where he went or discuss it, do other adminstrations want to talk to ( waste time ) a shadow minister who has no chance oif getting the job ?.
Goff yeah that make a lot of sense as does McCully. Actually Lockwood Smith looks very good ( Again !! ) shit we have a speaker who can do the job and takes the job seriously
July 30th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Lockwood has access to the Speaker’s flat in Parliament, obviously, but he doesn’t live there. He stays in his apartment in Bowen House, but uses the Speaker’s flat for entertaining, as is traditional.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
“Sir Roger is also against the 39% income tax rate but he still complies with it. Are you suggesting he should not?”
radvad – I like Roger Douglas – but he should be setting some sort of example. It’s called having principles
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
crazy donkey, this will be about the first and probably only time I agree with you!
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
Hey, does anybody remember how that “dancer’ got vilified because he wanted these figures published about ten years ago? Rodney Hide; love him or loathe him ( as most lickspittles do) but I am sure that without his influence we would not have seen this information.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
“I fly a few times a month and I would do anything to avoid it, if it were not for the fact I can’t get to Auckland by teleportation”
Don’t worry the cycleway will be opening shortly.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
can anyone on this blog explain the policy around subsidised travel for holidays? The news said it ranged from 25% to 90%, which is a pretty big band. What is this based on and does it apply to any class of travel, e.g business first, and is it unlimited?
personally I can see the argument for paying them to travel domestically, and can appreciate the argument for subsisiding spouses to travel to meet their partners (even though i dont agree with it I can see its a valid argument) but I can see no justification for paying for flights for MP vacations.
is this just some disgraceful rort or is there a reasonable argument to support this?
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 8:58 pm
I see according to Stuff, Katrina Shanks is our most frugal MP
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/2703043/MPs-expense-details-released
Nice to see her looking after the taxpayers money in Ohariu.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
Patrick you are not thinking Douglas advocates against entitlement, but is happy too take it, he is setting the example and fuck me I can’t see a lot of difference between him and a woman getting the DPB in Waikato. I will cane Labour because I have lost faith in them. I will support John Key because Labour hasn’t any policy direction. National has, and I think many labour supporters will change mood due to Paula Bennett and her issues this week but I hope national is smart enough to let Douglas hang out to dry. I predict a big jump for National in the polls and I think Paula Bennett just crossed the threashold she is a Minister but she has brought on board Ms. Johnston, shit Mrs. King you got the fraudualent silly bitch yeah, well I think Labour incompetence will cause 2 tearms in opposition if not 4
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
>>>>>>>>&Parasites ;<<<<<<<<<<
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Is it me or have the Greens spent on average more per MP on air travel than any other party?
Vote:Ironic.
July 30th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
the GREENS were the party that voluntarily started this disclosure i would thank them if I were you (if u approve of course)
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Crikey, that’s a lot of 10-trip tickets for the Greens! ….. Unless of course they themselves just really don’t do trains and buses like they tell us to.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
At least we don’t have to pay $60k a day for a NZ Air force one!
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
WTF has Chris Carter been up to ? Talk about the invisible MP, when was the last time he even asked a question in he house ? He is the opposition spokesman on foriegn affairs not the “Shadow Minister for taking holidays around the world with my partner’. Wasnt he also the highest spender when he was eduacation minister too.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
What Kapital is saying is that the GREENS are proud of their larger-than-average expenses and wanted to showcase their consumption acumen.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Pongo, Carter and his boyfriend just have very good, but expensive taste. We are duty bound to pay for it. At least they don’t have a moat in need of a good old fashioned scrubbing
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
Kapital, apologises for the subtly. Let me be clear, the irony was directed at the hypocrisy of the Green Party having a larger carbon footprint on average than any other political party, with respect to air travel.
As the defining policy area for them (supposedly) it surprises me somewhat.
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
carter [deleted by DPF]
Vote:July 30th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
bit of a non-story really. MPs move around on business, this costs money. Nothing to see here, move along.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 4:08 am
Nothing to see here … except Roger rogering us again. Hope Lady Douglas got her rocks off for 90K.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 6:34 am
Douglas showing his Labour Party roots. “I’m Entitled” he said…
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 7:26 am
I wonder what Rodney “Perk-buster” Hide made of Douglas’ appearance on the news last night
http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2009/07/not-good-look.html
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 7:30 am
Sir Roger obviously had an Ingham Chicken Moment when he was unexpectedly doorstepped by the media on his taxpayer subsidised holidays. Don’t do as I do, says Rog. Obey as I say.
But where’s the forensic drill down into politician’s expenses though? You know: the porn movie hires, minibar devastation, rental back of their own morgage free homes, taxis for 200 yard trips, 5-star cleaning of the water feature, etc.. Surely our mob can’t be less greedy and creative than their British counterparts when it comes to some good old-fashioned entitlement troughing?
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 8:41 am
@ put it away – agree entirely. Little country at the arse end of the world, people have to travel to get stuff done. Big deal.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 8:50 am
I’m disappointed in Roger Douglas. Not surprised, but just disappointed.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 8:57 am
As a previous ACT voter and general supporter of what Roger Douglas has achieved I’m absolutly gobsmacked as to his justification of the holiday spend entitlements.
I hope Rodney gives him a kick up the arse.
Probably has cost them any chance of me voting for ACT ever again.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 9:41 am
“can anyone on this blog explain the policy around subsidised travel for holidays? The news said it ranged from 25% to 90%”
I think, but would not die to defend, that the subsidy depends on how many terms or years the claimant served as an MP. I also seem to remember that this perk was awarded in place of a pay-rise for MPs many years ago, and so reflects a deferred income that, because of DCF type calculations, is deemed to be cheaper than having paid the MPs what they would otherwise have been worth.
Personally, I would prefer they receive a simple “all-inclusive” salary like most of us, and procure their own pensions, travel perks, etc., out of that the way we all do. I would have no problem paying a PM the same as (say,) the Group CEO of Telecom, a Cabinet Minister the same as one of that company’s Operating Group (e.g. Wholesale) CEOs, and so on down the line. (Telecom, as our biggest company, is probably an appropriate benchmark).
As for “business travel”. If the work must be done face-to-face the cost needs to be incurred. However, I don’t believe MPs should schedule any appointments outside Wellington between Tuesday Morning and Thursday Evening, as these are times when the House and Select Committees are scheduled to work, and they (MPs who are not Ministers) should be there doing the basic work we pay them for.
[DPF: The travel perk for ex MPs no longer exists since 1999, except for those who have it grandfathered in - ie were elected befroe then]
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 9:57 am
I’m typically very supportive of Roger Douglas’s thinking and ideas but I’m very disappointed in his approach here.
Yes he is legally entitled to spend that money as reported, but he has missed a huge opportunity to seize the moral high ground here for what is ultimately not a significant amount of money. This dilutes his message and makes the taunts of “do as i say, not as i do” or “the rules don’t apply to Roger, only the little people” outweigh the otherwise sensible pressure coming from ACT.
He had and I suppose still has a chance to send a message of integrity (as opposed to legality) to the wider electorate. The only sensible role for ACT is the promoter of common sense and integrity, and Roger is messing with the message.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 10:05 am
“I’ve yet to meet any regular traveller who actually enjoys it.”
Yep, I spent a couple of years commuting weekly from Auckland to Wellington. When my wife said she wanted a holiday I told her I would go anywhere I didn’t have to fly and didn’t have to drive.
We took the QuickCat to Great Barrier.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 10:55 am
It may have changed a little but it used to be that in your second term, any international travel is subsidised by 25%, 50% in your third term and (I thought 100% but from the article on Douglas it looks like 90%) from four terms on. There was a discussion about this a few years ago – as I recall the Greens wanted a transparent salary and pay for your own (non parliamentary) international travel but rugby loving MPs voted us down because they wanted to be able to get to the world cup cheaper. It is basically an incentive to travel overseas, subsidised by non-travelling MPs who receive a lower salary as a result..
I agree that ex MPs who are eligible for on going perks (pre 1999 ones) should also have their claims on public money revealed. Actually I don’t see why they should have permanent perks at all, but I guess its legally difficult to wrest them from them at this stage.
Higher travel expenses may correlate with more work output for sitting MPs, or may not. While it is good that they are now more transparent (thank the Greens) I don’t think they actually tell us much of value. Maybe it will drive more demand for teleconferencing services etc in parliament though.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 10:56 am
“How come Roger Douglas is clocking up big money? He’s supposed to be against government spending!”
I agree with the above statement. Sir Roger Douglas should’ve forked out his own money to take his family to the U.K.
It’s a matter of principle. You cannot decry excessive government spending while taking advantage of the system at the same time, for whatever legal reasons.
It’s very disappointing to see the gulf between theory and practice once politicians’ pockets (across the spectrum) are involved.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 11:32 am
I know I’ve asked this here before without a response, but does all this taxpayer-funded Parliamentary air travel and accommodation accrue airpoints? And if so, what are these airpoints being redeemed for?
Or does the Parliamentary Travel office just get cheaper travel/accommodation for MP’s and staff, in return for no airpoints eligibility?
I hope its the latter, but it would be nice to know for sure that this is not a hidden perk for those who work in Parliament. If it is a perk, then presumably Parliamentary Services will also be paying the FBT on this….
[DPF: They do accrue airpoints. Airpoints belong to Air NZ and not Parliament. Airpoints do not attract FBT. MPs are requested to cancel any airpoints balance they have when they leave Parliament and only use airpoints to subsidise parliamentary travel. But as they belong to Air NZ, it is not mandatory as it can not be enforced]
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 11:46 am
I hope I’m wrong, but as far as I know MP’s travelling do earn them airpoints, which are kept under wraps and have never been disclosed by Parliamentary Services.
You might know some of Parliament’s activities are not covered by the Official Information Act (OIA).
So much for openness and accountability.
[DPF: PS does not know what airpoints an MP has]
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Much better they get judged on performance, the media is being so petty. I’d much rather a minister get out and about and make good decisions than one that sits on their bum all day doing nothing. Ditto for the media.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Given the massive contribution Roger has made to this country, I don’t begrudge him doing this.
Besides, maybe he is trying to prove his point about “getting the incentives right”.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 3:53 pm
talk about a meida beat-up Roger’s spending was not so bad.
He would have been entitled to this whether he was in parliament or not – considering the benefits long-serving MPs used to get – at least he is working for that entitlement, and hasn’t given up on New Zealanders.
He has more to give than to take when it comes to NZ’s future – and that can be said about many solo mother’s too, as much as he talks about welfare reform, you will never hear this man ‘bashing’ beneficiaries, because he knows its all about incentives.
Things are never just cut-and-dry, that’s why its good to actually listen to what the man is saying.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Nandor Tanczos does not think that ex-MPs should be entitled to ongoing perks. I wonder if that extends to seats on taxpayer funded boards and commissions that seem to attract a lot of his ex-colleagues. Often without any relevence to their previous experience.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Heidihi I fucking hate Douglas and Richardson neither of whom have any compassion for the ordinary punter in my eyes.
Now I know of a couple of widows whose farmer husbands committed suicide back in the eighties when policy was changed overnight.
What did we hear from Douglas and co, was it ? there is no alternative, that would be fucking easy to say when one is coining it as a minister.
We are told we have to tighten belts, but I did not hear bloody Douglas offer to give up one of his bloody perks as he rants on about decreasing government spending.
Vote:Yes there is one part of government spending I would bloody cut.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:00 pm
well, johnbt, I don’t think MPs should be excluded from sitting on boards, no. Getting paid for work is a bit different than getting free travel and a nice pension for doing FA.
However when Government’s appoint ex MPs of their own party, it does deserve close scrutiny. You’d want to be sure they are capable of doing the work, and its not just payback for loyalty.
As for the airpoints, we tried to get PS to use them for our parliamentary travel, but they are so restrictive in their use that it wasn’t practical unfortunately.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 5:31 pm
“As for the airpoints, we tried to get PS to use them for our parliamentary travel, but they are so restrictive in their use that it wasn’t practical unfortunately.”
That’s bullshit Nandor. The amount of travelling the Ministers etc. are doing, they will all be Gold Elite/Platinum or such, once you hit that level, then most restrictions are “removed” from the Airpoints schemes, by the way of more flexible options. This is true with AirNZ, Qantas, and Singapore Air… and I would know!!
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Anyone who thinks flying around New Zealand is a perk must be dreaming.
Vote:All that travel requirement is one reason I turned down an invitation to stand for Parliament.
Overseas travel on business is even harder and I was so relieved when I no longer spent three months of every year overseas. However, travelling on government business with minders every step of the way is quite different as I discovered when I travelled though some Australian cities as part of the Commission of Enquiry into the Establishment of Casinos in NZ. Mind you I remember thinking I was glad we not on a tour of sewage plants. One of my rooms had a ceiling mirror over the bed.
I used to wonder how people like Kissinger survived but the minder process means you are not in that continued state of anxiety about time zones, time to the airport and where the hell you are actually going.
Again, it makes such intensive possible – still no perk or pleasure.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Getting excited over a few million of (legitimate) MP’s expenses is a complete waste of time.
If you really want to get worked up over an issue that is causing massive damage to this countries economic growth try that abomination “Working for Families” that is sucking $2,932,000,000 out of the productive sector and into the pockets of people like Natasha Fuller (or as Dave Crampton calls her Fuller shit) : http://bit.ly/Hr1Gh
I guess it is much easier for the chattering classes in the nations smoko rooms to focus their ire on a few politicians than face up to the fact that electing Labour three times in a row fucked this country like a $10 hooker.
Vote:July 31st, 2009 at 7:03 pm
nandor tanczos A question, why is it in this country that MPs seem to believe they are doing something special.
I notice that Douglas has a knighthood, for what ?
I also notice he has the right to take his wife to the UK at 10% of the cost of the air fare used.
Yet, Corporal Apiata VC gets the grand total of $1200 a year for what he did.
Vote:One has to wonder who deserves almost free air travel for life the most ?
Strange values we have do we not ?
August 1st, 2009 at 2:19 am
Take a pill hori.
Razork – with all due respect, if you won’t vote ACT again after this, I expect you won’t be voting National either – as they are wrecking their big chance to reverse what Labour did. So you’re either going to the Libertarianz or you’re going leftwards… right?
Vote:August 1st, 2009 at 7:36 am
I agree Grumpy.
Vote: