Dr Doug Naysmith

No moat, no bathplug, no Home Cinema

Doug Naysmith, MP for Bristol NW

The past few weeks have been great fun for comedians, astonishing and enraging for the public and very unhappy for MPs. I have always enjoyed my job in the past. I think it is an important one and I have counted it a great privilege to represent the people of Bristol North West. There is a great deal of variety in the work and we meet many fascinating people; our constituents, world leaders; knowledgeable people at the top of their professions, and even some ‘celebrities’. I know that politicians as a group were never held in high esteem generally but most people were pleased to see their local MP. Not now. As an invited guest to a reception of health professionals, I had to listen to the other speakers making jokes about my expenses. At an old friend’s birthday party, someone I had never seen before and who knew nothing about my expense claims thought that he should grab me by the tie and swear at me, as I was obviously a greedy, cheating scumbag.

In case others think the same, I should like to set the record straight. I have lived in Bristol since 1971, the last sixteen years in Shirehampton. I have a small three-bedroom house there and, naturally, I count that as my main home. It was my main home when I became an MP in 1997 and it has stayed that way ever since – no ‘flipping’ to maximise expenses or minimise taxes. It is my home and I pay for everything in it and everything that is done to it with my own money, just like you do. When the boiler breaks, I pay to have it mended. I pay the window cleaner and the man who tidies the garden and, if I had a moat, I would pay to have that emptied too.

Some constituents have asked me why MPs should get any allowances for a second home at all. I reply that to do our jobs properly we need to have somewhere handy for both the constituency and Parliament. We are not in the same position as someone who chooses to live in one town and work in another: we do work in both and we have to sleep somewhere – though not somewhere luxurious. In London I claim for a one-bedroom basement flat, which currently comes to £21,744 out of a permitted £24,006. The flat was furnished largely with bits and pieces I already owned. It is rented so when I leave Parliament, I will make no capital gain.

MPs are allowed to claim for transport between their constituencies and Westminster. Again, I think this is reasonable, except for those in easy commuting distance, and abolishing it would be unfair on, say, the MP for the Western Isles. I usually travel by rail, though unfortunately, I cannot usually take advantage of the biggest discounts as I do not know long enough in advance exactly which train I will catch. However, I do have a Senior Rail Card which saves 20% off each journey and I benefit, as do all over 60s, from free local travel around London.

By far the largest part of my expenses (and the one which is, perhaps, least understood) goes on paying my staff and running my constituency office. This is paid directly by the House of Commons Fees Office and does not come into my hands at all. The latest available figures show that I claimed 78% of the permitted £22,193 (£17,393) for the rent and heating of my office in Southmead, plus the telephone, computer equipment and stationery.

I employ one full-time assistant in my office at Westminster and the equivalent of two full time case-workers and a part-time secretary in my Southmead office. Their salaries come to 85% of the permitted £100,205.00 (£84,962) though in some earlier years this was higher because a previous secretary had multiple absences due to ill health and I had to employ several temporary replacements. My staff are the first point of call for the many constituents who contact me with problems and so far this year we have received over two hundred new requests for help via the Southmead office. The largest number is about Benefits, followed by housing, immigration, problems with the Council and Tax Credits. My London office deals with constituents’ correspondence about policy matters.

This year I have also claimed £6,026 of a Communications Allowance of £10,400. I spent this on the printing and delivery of my annual report to my constituents – a leaflet designed to give an insight into some of my many activities around the constituency and my work at Westminster. I know from your feedback that this is appreciated by some, though I realise not all, of the people of Bristol North West. The Communications Allowance also pays for adverts in community papers and newsletters to let people know how to get in touch.

There may be a few invoices which have not yet been presented to add to that total but the information above is as accurate as I can make it at the moment and it gives the basic picture of my expenses.
There is one last misunderstanding I should like to correct. Recently, when I was thanked for a gift for a raffle prize, someone suggested that, of course, it had come out of my expenses. In fact, I can assure all the schools, charities or community associations who have asked me for such prizes in the past that the House of Commons teddies, bottles of whisky or champagne have been gifts from me and not the tax-payer.

I have also been asked why MPs who were putting in excessive or unjustified claims did nothing to stop those who were. In this I suppose we were all to blame by being prepared to wait for Sir Christopher Kelly’s committee to recommend changes. I can assure you, though, that while I was aware that some MPs claimed for things that I did not, I was as astounded and horrified as anyone else at some of the revelations.

I know there will be people who still question why MPs should have expenses at all. I hope that fair minded people will agree that we do not want to go back to the time when only rich people could be MPs because others could not afford the cost of travel and accommodation. Nevertheless, the rules need to be tightened and every MP is aware that the words “You can only claim for … additional expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred to enable you to stay overnight away from your only or main home for the purpose of performing your Parliamentary duties” mean exactly what they say.

Cost Allowance Receipts, by financial year:

2007-2008

2006-2007

2005-2006

2004-2005

Explanatory note:
I am using the redacted receipts provided by the House of Commons Fees Office which had some sections already blanked out. I understand this is required by the Data Protection Act 1998. to protect sensitive information such as bank account details, addresses and telephone numbers and information which could be used to identify other people. These areas do not hide purchases. You may also notice irregular page numbering in some places. This is because non-relevant pages (eg fax cover notes) have been deleted.