This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/8025987.stm

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Commons to vote on expenses move 'Lunacy' attack over MP expenses
(1 day later)
Gordon Brown's plans to reform the system of MPs' expenses will go to a series of House of Commons votes later. Gordon Brown's plans to reform MPs' allowances have been attacked by all parties during a heated Commons debate.
His proposals include more transparency over second jobs and MPs' staff being employed by the Commons authorities. The Tories called it "utter lunacy" for ministers to bow to pressure to delay changes to second homes expenses, while pushing ahead with other votes.
But Mr Brown's plan to abolish the controversial second homes allowance in favour of flat-rate attendance expenses was dropped amid widespread opposition. NO 10 dismissed claims this represented a climb-down, and said claims Mr Brown had lost authority were "rubbish".
The votes are seen as a test of his authority after the government suffered a Commons defeat on Wednesday. MPs also raised concerns about plans to make the Commons directly responsible for employing their members of staff.
The decision by MPs to back a Liberal Democrat motion, calling for more former Gurkhas to be allowed to live in the UK, was only Labour's fourth Commons loss since the party came to power in 1997. Lib Dem David Heath said the prime minister's plans had been conceived without discussion, seemingly "on the back of a fag packet".
'Interim' The votes on expenses come a day after the government was defeated in the Commons over its policies on the rights of former Gurkhas to settle in the UK, increasing pressure on Mr Brown.
Mr Brown's expenses plans, revealed on YouTube last week, followed widespread criticism of MPs and ministers, particularly over the second homes allowance - worth up to £24,000 a year. 'Not sustainable'
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith and Work Minister Tony McNulty are being investigated over their claims, although both say they acted within the rules. Earlier this week the prime minister dropped his main expenses proposal - calling for the abolition of second homes allowances worth up to £24,000 a year, to be replaced by flat-rate expenses for attending Parliament - amid widespread opposition.
Downing Street said the measures to be voted on by MPs would be "interim", remaining in place until the recommendations of a more thorough review by the independent Committee for Standards in Public Life are implemented. But the government had still intended to push through a vote stating the principle that the system needed reform as soon as possible.
This government respects the will of the House of Commons Immigration Minister Phil Woolas As the debate started several MPs questioned the point of making any decisions at all ahead of the publication of an outside report into the system later this year.
Mr Brown's proposals include ordering MPs to provide receipts to support all expenses claims by removing the current £25 lower threshold. Commons leader Harriet Harman said she had accepted an amendment from senior backbenchers, which would effectively delay any changes on the second homes allowance until that inquiry - by Sir Christopher Kelly's standards committee - was complete.
He also suggests giving a senior group of MPs, the Members Estimate Committee, the power to amend the Green Book governing rules on expenses. To lose your authority once may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose it twice begins to look like carelessness class="" href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2009/04/a_bit_of_a_week.html">Nick Robinson's blog
On Monday the government dropped its plan for a daily Westminster attendance allowance amid opposition from the Tories, Lib Dems and some Labour backbenchers. But there was much confusion as she went on to state that votes would go ahead on Mr Brown's other proposals, such as stopping outer London MPs claiming a second homes allowance.
Opponents had said the system, used in the European Parliament, amounted to a "cheque for turning up to work", as it would not require receipts, and would bring "the Brussels gravy train to Westminster". Ms Harman said continuing to make payments to MPs living with 20 miles of Westminster for second homes was "not sustainable" and needed reform soon.
Meanwhile, the cross-party Standards and Privileges Committee of MPs has tabled its own motion, calling for any decision to be delayed until after the conclusion of the independent inquiry - expected to take months. Some MPs raised questions about government moves to put their staff on the House of Commons payroll - and the fact that they would not be voting on ministers with "grace and favour" accommodation who claim for a second home.
'Shameful' 'Absolutely absurd'
The prime minister has said he wants interim reforms in place by July - when details of all MPs' claims under the second home allowance dating back to 2004 are due to be published, after the Commons authorities lost a freedom of information fight. Ms Harman said that would instead be dealt with in the ministerial code, effective from 1 July.
The debate and vote will be the second strong test of his authority in two days. She said much of the criticism of MPs' expenses had been "simply unfair" but they needed to respond with "sensible action".
On Wednesday, MPs decided by 267 to 246 to back a Lib Dem motion offering all retired Gurkhas an equal right of residence in the UK, with the Tories and 27 Labour rebels backing it. However, shadow Commons leader Alan Duncan told MPs the House would look "absolutely absurd" if they went ahead with other votes at this stage.
Some 36,000 of the former soldiers have been denied UK residency because they served in the British army before 1997. He said successive prime ministers had not wanted to put up expenses and that had led to heavier use of allowances, which was "unacceptable in the modern age".
Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg called the government's position "shameful". FROM THE TODAY PROGRAMME class="" href="/1/hi/uk_politics/8023882.stm">Brown defeated over Gurkha rules class="" href="/1/hi/uk_politics/8020332.stm">MP attendance pay plan abandoned class="" href="/1/hi/uk_politics/8022144.stm">Brown defends MP expenses plans
A few hours after the Gurkhas vote, immigration minister Phil Woolas appeared before MPs to say new proposals would be published before Parliament's summer recess, telling them: "This government respects the will of the House of Commons." The prime minister's official spokesman said it was "complete rubbish" to suggest Mr Brown had reduced his standing as a result of the compromises.
He added that it was "always going to be difficult to change a system that's been in place for many years".
In the Commons, several MPs - including senior Labour backbencher Tony Wright - said they should agree to wait for the independent inquiry by Sir Christopher Kelly's committee and should commit now to accepting its findings in full.
For the Liberal Democrats, David Heath criticised the way the government had gone about bringing forward its proposal.
He said there had been "no sense of leadership from the prime minister" who had announced plans without consulting his own party or other party leaders.
"Then he comes up with his proposals, apparently written on the back of a fag packet," he said.
There was also a surprise intervention from Derek Conway, the ex-Tory MP whose employment of his sons earned him a reprimand last year and started the whole row over expenses.
Dealing with big issues
He suggested investigations by Commons committees tended to shield frontbenchers - making reference to the inquiry into Tory MP Caroline Spelman and suggesting the inquiry into his affairs had been more thorough.
He said he still "bears the scars" of the scrutiny that he was put under and said there were 200 "close family employees" in the Commons - a figure which rose to 250 if lovers and in-laws were included.
He defended MPs who employed relatives - sometimes for "confidentiality and convenience". He added that while the government was trying to use "great haste" to resolve the matter "it will not finish today".
It's a pity that the prime minister wants to play politics on this rather than sort it out David Cameron PM 'losing authority' - Cameron
Earlier Mr Brown was asked if his authority had been damaged by the Gurkha vote on Wednesday and the expenses row. He said he was focused on matters like the swine flu alert, adding: "We are dealing with the big issues and we are not going to be diverted."
He said he hoped MPs would "accept and implement immediately" his expenses proposals in votes, which if they happen, are expected at about 1700 BST.
The remaining proposals include more transparency over second jobs, receipts for all claims - not just those over £25 as now - and MPs' staff being employed by the Commons authorities.
Conservative leader David Cameron said the government was "running out of political authority" after "U-turns" on the Gurkhas and expenses.
He said his front bench would be whipped on the expenses vote but backbenchers would get a free vote.
The Tories and Liberal Democrats opposed Mr Brown's plan to replace the second homes allowance with flat-rate daily attendance expenses. They argued it would be less transparent and amounted to MPs being paid for turning up.
The prime minister has said he wants interim reforms in place by July - when details of all MPs' claims under the second home allowance dating back to 2004 are due to be published, after a freedom of information fight.