Independent Pay Review
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,868
Received 2,816 Likes
on
1,200 Posts
Without wanting to sound disrespectful,
One wonders if Charles Kennedy's resettlement allowances will be paid now he is no longer with us, as I should imagine they take a while to get sorted and paid.
One wonders if Charles Kennedy's resettlement allowances will be paid now he is no longer with us, as I should imagine they take a while to get sorted and paid.
Resettlement Grant
The Resettlement Grant is the name given to the MPs severance pay package. It may be claimed to help former MPs with the costs of adjusting to nonparliamentary life. It is payable to any Member who ceases to be an MP at a General Election. The amount is based on age and length of service, and varies between 50% and 100% of the annual salary payable to a Member of Parliament at the time of the Dissolution.[8]
In the UK the first £30,000 of severance pay is tax free. The amount retiring MPs, or those who lose their seats receive depends on how old they are and how long they have served in the House. For example. an MP who stays in office for one term (say 5 years) and then leaves office will currently receive tax-free severance pay of 50% of his current salary, or £32,383 at current rates - equivalent to an annual salary increment of over £12,000 at current tax rates and pay scales.[9]
For the 2010-2015 Parliament, only MPs defeated in their attempt to be re-elected will get one month’s salary for each year served, up to a maximum of six months or over £33,000. From the start of the 2015 Parliament, it will be replaced by a "Loss of Office Payment", at double the statutory redundancy payment. "For the 'average' MP, who leaves office with 11 years' service, this may lead to a payment of around £14,850."[10]
The Resettlement Grant is the name given to the MPs severance pay package. It may be claimed to help former MPs with the costs of adjusting to nonparliamentary life. It is payable to any Member who ceases to be an MP at a General Election. The amount is based on age and length of service, and varies between 50% and 100% of the annual salary payable to a Member of Parliament at the time of the Dissolution.[8]
In the UK the first £30,000 of severance pay is tax free. The amount retiring MPs, or those who lose their seats receive depends on how old they are and how long they have served in the House. For example. an MP who stays in office for one term (say 5 years) and then leaves office will currently receive tax-free severance pay of 50% of his current salary, or £32,383 at current rates - equivalent to an annual salary increment of over £12,000 at current tax rates and pay scales.[9]
For the 2010-2015 Parliament, only MPs defeated in their attempt to be re-elected will get one month’s salary for each year served, up to a maximum of six months or over £33,000. From the start of the 2015 Parliament, it will be replaced by a "Loss of Office Payment", at double the statutory redundancy payment. "For the 'average' MP, who leaves office with 11 years' service, this may lead to a payment of around £14,850."[10]
Listening to the chairman of IPSA on R4, he declared that polis had expanded their allowances to make up for lack of pay rises and...IPSA are now formalising the reduction of allowances to replace those inflated allowances with a 10% pay-rise!
So.... why do the rest of the public sector not get a 10% pay-rise to make up for their losses in T&C's?
OAP
So.... why do the rest of the public sector not get a 10% pay-rise to make up for their losses in T&C's?
OAP
Jim I guess that the important S in all of that is substitute! Ie you only get the allowance when you can't get Mess accm. I wasn't comparing the JPA system with other organisations, only with the simple and easy to administer rates system. As a taxpayer I would say employing more civil servants to send out bills for trivial amounts is pathetic. Come to think of it didn't PUS put out a blog asking for suggestions to save waste? What no one has ever explained is how one of the lowest Caps (UK-£25) is sufficient in one of the most expensive countries. As a final point -why does this MOD allowance (CG words not mine) not apply to the civil servants who set the rules?
They could have solved polis' accommodation in Town once and for all, but instead they chose to sell off various barracks and buildings that could have been converted - OWOB, Chelsea Bks etc
May have been costly at the start to covert to Grade 1 accommodation as some of these buildings need considerable work but no more so than other infra projects, and longer term would have saved a fortune by having MPs accommodation provided for, thus negating the need to rent/buy accommodation at public expense. Andy Burnham already owns a property in Town, but was reportedly 'forced' to rent somewhere by the system at public expense. And they wonder why we don't have a great opinion of them!
May have been costly at the start to covert to Grade 1 accommodation as some of these buildings need considerable work but no more so than other infra projects, and longer term would have saved a fortune by having MPs accommodation provided for, thus negating the need to rent/buy accommodation at public expense. Andy Burnham already owns a property in Town, but was reportedly 'forced' to rent somewhere by the system at public expense. And they wonder why we don't have a great opinion of them!
Vasco
As far as i am aware, no extra civil servants were employed for jpa audit purposes. The only audits i've had done to me were by mil staff in my UPO or JSAU. The CS has been cut year on year, and the admin grades utterly gutted. Believe me these mythical auditors really dont exist. At best you may have encountered one or two people who had a new job title, but were some of the last survivors of the old admin grades. I am heartily sick of the tired lie that JPA saw extra civil servants recruited to do the admin. Its total utter horse manure.
Secondly, what is this cap and mod allowance you are talking about? The MOD CS is on actual expenses and has been for many many years. More to the point, service expenses are set by military personnel not civilian - i know its more fun to blame the nasty civvies for setting rules, but last time i checked, it was the Military responsible for their T&C not Civvies.
Finally on SSSA - wasnt clear on my post. I meant to say we should build an armed forces central mess in london and put everyone there, and not in Pimlico. The sheer cost of SSSA for London is ridiculous, i've heard and seen figures of north of £100m per year particularly when a mess would pay for itself in savings very quickly. Oddly when i've spoken to my mil colleagues about losing the flat in Pimlico, and having a mess room on some of the MOD estate in London, they get very change resistant, very quickly!
As far as i am aware, no extra civil servants were employed for jpa audit purposes. The only audits i've had done to me were by mil staff in my UPO or JSAU. The CS has been cut year on year, and the admin grades utterly gutted. Believe me these mythical auditors really dont exist. At best you may have encountered one or two people who had a new job title, but were some of the last survivors of the old admin grades. I am heartily sick of the tired lie that JPA saw extra civil servants recruited to do the admin. Its total utter horse manure.
Secondly, what is this cap and mod allowance you are talking about? The MOD CS is on actual expenses and has been for many many years. More to the point, service expenses are set by military personnel not civilian - i know its more fun to blame the nasty civvies for setting rules, but last time i checked, it was the Military responsible for their T&C not Civvies.
Finally on SSSA - wasnt clear on my post. I meant to say we should build an armed forces central mess in london and put everyone there, and not in Pimlico. The sheer cost of SSSA for London is ridiculous, i've heard and seen figures of north of £100m per year particularly when a mess would pay for itself in savings very quickly. Oddly when i've spoken to my mil colleagues about losing the flat in Pimlico, and having a mess room on some of the MOD estate in London, they get very change resistant, very quickly!
Jim put it this way-at the secret Oxon base there are 2 individuals who do nothing but audit claims.Regardless of their previous employment they would not be needed in a rates system. As for the Cap, when the military changed to actuals we followed the civil servants rules ie reasonable actuals etc. Then all of a sudden our claims were subject to a limit in the case of the UK £25 . Not only that CG at HW (civil servants ) go out of their way to try and ensure you can't even spend that. The MOD limit bit is a direct quote from said organisation.
I take your point about London I just doubt we have the money to invest!
I take your point about London I just doubt we have the money to invest!
So as far as i can tell, you are grumbling that two civil servants who are likely admin grades, who probably have other duties and who are paid a pittance perform a basic audit and scrutiny function for one of the largest bases in the RAF, which is no different to how many other large companies have auditors for exactly the same purposes on expenses scrutiny.
Its also cheaper to get a CS to audit than mil, so well done Brize for saving money in setting that one up.
As for capping claims - i can barely understand what you are referring to, but as far as i can male out, you are moaning that your claim is limited to £25 for some things? You do realise that this is a fairly standard level dont you? my wifes former company had a £20 limit for expenses and they were fairly large. Across mod as a whole i understand the civvy mod is moving to £25 actuals, if not slightly lower for meals atvthe moment, so no one is getting one over on you.
I am not saying things are perfect, but i am sick to death of bloody whinging about how bad everything is, when in fact it is only on apar with how the rest of the real world acts and treats expenses, and that actually the military expenses system is surprisingly generous compared to an awful lot of places.
There are times i swear i could give everyone in the military a 500% payrise, scrap PAYD, unlimited expenses, and free car and you'd still hear people whinging about how hard done by they are.
Its also cheaper to get a CS to audit than mil, so well done Brize for saving money in setting that one up.
As for capping claims - i can barely understand what you are referring to, but as far as i can male out, you are moaning that your claim is limited to £25 for some things? You do realise that this is a fairly standard level dont you? my wifes former company had a £20 limit for expenses and they were fairly large. Across mod as a whole i understand the civvy mod is moving to £25 actuals, if not slightly lower for meals atvthe moment, so no one is getting one over on you.
I am not saying things are perfect, but i am sick to death of bloody whinging about how bad everything is, when in fact it is only on apar with how the rest of the real world acts and treats expenses, and that actually the military expenses system is surprisingly generous compared to an awful lot of places.
There are times i swear i could give everyone in the military a 500% payrise, scrap PAYD, unlimited expenses, and free car and you'd still hear people whinging about how hard done by they are.
I guess we will never agree -to my mind (as a taxpayer -no longer a claimant) the system is over-administered. I am also pretty sure that my assumptions about the auditor establishment are correct.
Jimlad, you put make your point as delicately as ever, Sir 
. Seriously, though, I think you make some very good points. The whole point of allowances is to prevent anyone being 'out of pocket' due expenses incurred in the line of duty. Everything has to be caveated with the phrase 'within reason', or whatever official terminology is appropriate. One could even argue that employees, personnel, MPs, representatives (delete as appropriate) would have to feed themselves whether at home, at work or working elsewhere and, therefore, the only allowance should be for any extra cost incurred. But that would not be particularly reasonable so employes don't do that. Good.
During my latter days in the RAF, it wasn't so much the size of the allowances or caps that seemed to me to piss people off, it was the difficulties involved with simply getting your claim processed. Or, the subsequent audits or worse. There is a government requirement to check a percentage of claims (not just for the military), but that does not even have to a particularly intrusive process if done properly as I learned during my subsequent time working at the Open University.
But a lot of folk do, frequently, run into unnecessarily difficult obstacles, or worse, on occasions. And that is not reasonable. I for one was arrested twice and charged with fraud over claims. On both accounts I was acquitted, but the process took well over a year on one occasion. Imagine how enjoyable that was. Both instances could have been cleared up with the Cheif Clerk in ten minutes, but times had changed. Reasonable?
You are right that the system is fundamentally reasonable as long as people can submit reasonable claims with expectation that they will be paid without undue hassle, be they military, CS or otherwise, and that the system will treat people reasonably.
Have I used the term 'reasonable' enough to convey my meaning?
. Seriously, though, I think you make some very good points. The whole point of allowances is to prevent anyone being 'out of pocket' due expenses incurred in the line of duty. Everything has to be caveated with the phrase 'within reason', or whatever official terminology is appropriate. One could even argue that employees, personnel, MPs, representatives (delete as appropriate) would have to feed themselves whether at home, at work or working elsewhere and, therefore, the only allowance should be for any extra cost incurred. But that would not be particularly reasonable so employes don't do that. Good.During my latter days in the RAF, it wasn't so much the size of the allowances or caps that seemed to me to piss people off, it was the difficulties involved with simply getting your claim processed. Or, the subsequent audits or worse. There is a government requirement to check a percentage of claims (not just for the military), but that does not even have to a particularly intrusive process if done properly as I learned during my subsequent time working at the Open University.
But a lot of folk do, frequently, run into unnecessarily difficult obstacles, or worse, on occasions. And that is not reasonable. I for one was arrested twice and charged with fraud over claims. On both accounts I was acquitted, but the process took well over a year on one occasion. Imagine how enjoyable that was. Both instances could have been cleared up with the Cheif Clerk in ten minutes, but times had changed. Reasonable?
You are right that the system is fundamentally reasonable as long as people can submit reasonable claims with expectation that they will be paid without undue hassle, be they military, CS or otherwise, and that the system will treat people reasonably.
Have I used the term 'reasonable' enough to convey my meaning?
Independent Pay Review
There is one key reason that a lot of us RAF types hate the actuals system. It works absolutely fine when one person goes away for a couple of nights. They collect receipts and claim back their money via JPA.
However, now imagine a squadron (150-200 people) going on a detachment for 4-6 weeks. They are given a weeks worth of money in advance. At the end of that week they must all line up with a fistful of receipts and paperwork to present to a team of adminers in order to work out how much money they get for the following week. This process repeats itself at the end of every week.
Under the old system this job could be done by one clerk and all they had to do was give out rates to each individual and collect a signature.
It saved money by not requiring multiple clerks to deploy, it was far simpler and it didn't piss off every member of the detachment or force every individual to spend several hours completing mundane paperwork.
You can call it whinging if you like but these are the hairs that break the backs of camels.
I've said it before but if money saving was the aim they could have just cut the rates by 10-20% and kept the old system. People would have complained at first but that would have dissipated eventually.
Still, what's done is done.
BV
However, now imagine a squadron (150-200 people) going on a detachment for 4-6 weeks. They are given a weeks worth of money in advance. At the end of that week they must all line up with a fistful of receipts and paperwork to present to a team of adminers in order to work out how much money they get for the following week. This process repeats itself at the end of every week.
Under the old system this job could be done by one clerk and all they had to do was give out rates to each individual and collect a signature.
It saved money by not requiring multiple clerks to deploy, it was far simpler and it didn't piss off every member of the detachment or force every individual to spend several hours completing mundane paperwork.
You can call it whinging if you like but these are the hairs that break the backs of camels.
I've said it before but if money saving was the aim they could have just cut the rates by 10-20% and kept the old system. People would have complained at first but that would have dissipated eventually.
Still, what's done is done.
BV
So in other words Bob, it is unreasonable to expect a bunch of HMs finest to go through the total nausea of putting reciepts in their wallet for a week and putting them in a claim?
Sorry, thats just pathetic. I am currently overseas on detached duty, and i've been away for a week. Its been sheer hell for me to go to the effort or putting my reciept in a wallet knowing that i'llhave to show it to someone, just likeany other employee in a large business.
Come on guYs - there are some things worth moaning about. Having to get a copy of a reciept and keep it in your wallet to do some admin not remotely an issue compared to what you can be exposed to. This is what the real world is like-sprry to burst your bubble.
Its even more relevant when we hear the department is facing £500m of cuts - shall we go back to the old system and scrap jit, or shall we just cut back on the ability of people to kick the arrse out of a far too generous system?
Sorry, thats just pathetic. I am currently overseas on detached duty, and i've been away for a week. Its been sheer hell for me to go to the effort or putting my reciept in a wallet knowing that i'llhave to show it to someone, just likeany other employee in a large business.
Come on guYs - there are some things worth moaning about. Having to get a copy of a reciept and keep it in your wallet to do some admin not remotely an issue compared to what you can be exposed to. This is what the real world is like-sprry to burst your bubble.
Its even more relevant when we hear the department is facing £500m of cuts - shall we go back to the old system and scrap jit, or shall we just cut back on the ability of people to kick the arrse out of a far too generous system?
Jimlad
So how many people are you away with? Is it just you on your own or are you part of a group of 200?
If you'd taken the time to read my post instead of taking your blinkered view of the world you'd notice that I said it works well for an individual.
The admin is not quite as easy as you think it is. It's not just a matter of showing a receipt. It's the ridiculous forms that have to be filled out showing every meal and how much was spent as well as the receipts. Multiply this process by 200 and you have many wasted man hours alone. Now imagine the job of the adminer who has to read the form, check it is correct, calculate how much money is now to be issued to that individual and issue it. Multiply that by 200 as well. Now multiply all of the above by the number of weeks of the detachment and you get many more wasted man hours. Don't forget the audits after the detachment as well.
Does this process save money?
Not quite as easy as you showing your receipts to someone is it?
As I said I would have accepted a cut in allowances to prevent the advent of this system. There's your saving.
As far as calling people pathetic how about you pull your head out of your backside and put yourself in other people's shoes for a minute.
I'm sure you are awesome and your life is easy. The fact is that this sytem is a pain in the rear end and it gets up everyone's nose. If that's pathetic then so be it.
I fully disagree with people using rates to supplement their salary. But to be honest I never went on detachment with anyone like that. I did see young blokes spend it all on alcohol though. They were far happier!
Your inability to listen to others is painful. If you are representative of civil servants then do you really wonder why they get such bad press.
BV
Standing by to be called nasty names.
If you'd taken the time to read my post instead of taking your blinkered view of the world you'd notice that I said it works well for an individual.
The admin is not quite as easy as you think it is. It's not just a matter of showing a receipt. It's the ridiculous forms that have to be filled out showing every meal and how much was spent as well as the receipts. Multiply this process by 200 and you have many wasted man hours alone. Now imagine the job of the adminer who has to read the form, check it is correct, calculate how much money is now to be issued to that individual and issue it. Multiply that by 200 as well. Now multiply all of the above by the number of weeks of the detachment and you get many more wasted man hours. Don't forget the audits after the detachment as well.
Does this process save money?
Not quite as easy as you showing your receipts to someone is it?
As I said I would have accepted a cut in allowances to prevent the advent of this system. There's your saving.
As far as calling people pathetic how about you pull your head out of your backside and put yourself in other people's shoes for a minute.
I'm sure you are awesome and your life is easy. The fact is that this sytem is a pain in the rear end and it gets up everyone's nose. If that's pathetic then so be it.
I fully disagree with people using rates to supplement their salary. But to be honest I never went on detachment with anyone like that. I did see young blokes spend it all on alcohol though. They were far happier!
Your inability to listen to others is painful. If you are representative of civil servants then do you really wonder why they get such bad press.
BV
Standing by to be called nasty names.
It was always my personal belief that the JPA claims system was so convoluted and time consuming (deliberately so?) that for small claims many (most?) people couldn't be bothered to claim that to which they were entitled to under the rules pertaining at the time.
Perhaps that in itself generated a cost saving?
Perhaps that in itself generated a cost saving?
CM,
Sorry I didn't answer your questions about the changes in rules for MPs mortgages for second homes vs renting, wasn't meaning to be rude.
The short answer is I don't know, I would have to google it....
Sorry I didn't answer your questions about the changes in rules for MPs mortgages for second homes vs renting, wasn't meaning to be rude.
The short answer is I don't know, I would have to google it....
It was always my personal belief that the JPA claims system was so convoluted and time consuming that for small claims many (most?) people couldn't be bothered to claim that to which they were entitled to under the rules pertaining at the time.
"MT I need a car and driver now to take me from SHQ to the Bunker" "MT I need a car and driver now to take me from the Bunker out around the perimeter to the Squadron. " MT I now need a car and driver to take me back from the Squadron to the Officers' Mess for a Summer Ball Committee meeting"' etc. etc. and multiplied by dozens of others a day going about their business in support of the Crown. ( Yes, I did have MT vehicles later allocated for my own use, the first of which ( sort of) was a "sit up and beg" bicycle from the SWO's stores ).
BV, once again, good point, well made.
20 people turning up with a photocopy of the single bill for supper ain't going to be accepted. It will always come back to the argument of, "but I didn't have the onion bahjis or the cucumber rhaita!" Or, in reality, who had what, who spent what.
When it all gets too difficult, the system just needs to be "reasonable".
Folk on detachment don't have time to do the admins' jobs for them. And that is why I said that people are normally more pissed off with a difficult, seemingly unsupportive system than with the rates themselves. Sorry, "allowances" themselves.
20 people turning up with a photocopy of the single bill for supper ain't going to be accepted. It will always come back to the argument of, "but I didn't have the onion bahjis or the cucumber rhaita!" Or, in reality, who had what, who spent what.
When it all gets too difficult, the system just needs to be "reasonable".
Folk on detachment don't have time to do the admins' jobs for them. And that is why I said that people are normally more pissed off with a difficult, seemingly unsupportive system than with the rates themselves. Sorry, "allowances" themselves.
Charles Kennedy died after he lost his parliamentary seat. I would think he was entitled to the benefits attaching to losing his seat, and I trust his estate will be paid what he is due. That would only be right and proper, and I hope it eases the financial pain of Kennedy's death for his widow and son. I have a steel helmet hand for "incoming"............... (PS: I don't vote L-D either)