SCOTTISH peers are sitting in the first-class seats of the House of Lords gravy train, according to new research.
Unelected Labour, Tory and LibDem peers are raking it in – with some even claiming thousands of pounds despite never speaking.
Analysis by The Sunday Times found that the cost of peers’ expenses and daily attendance allowance rose by 29% in the year to last March to £23 million.
Though a spokesman for the House of Lords claimed that was because of an increase in the number of sitting days.
Peers are currently paid a daily rate of £313 tax-free for signing in and certifying that they are carrying out parliamentary work – though this is soon jumping up by an inflation-busting 3.1% to £323.
READ MORE: WATCH: Earl of Home urges us to eat squirrels in House of Lords
They can also claim travel expenses for themselves and family members.
Eight of the 20 biggest silent claimants were Scottish peers.
The Scottish peer with the biggest bill in 2018-19 was former First Minister Jack McConnell.
He claimed £68,781 for attending 149 sessions of the Lords and spoke 30 times in the chamber.
His former deputy First Minister Nicol Stephen wasn’t far behind. He claimed £62,167 for attending 136 sessions, though he only managed to speak four times.
Stephen’s party colleague, Malcolm Bruce, the former MP for Gordon, was far more productive. He claimed £66,776 for attending 151 sessions, speaking 52 times.
In terms of cash-per-word, Labour’s Lord Foulkes is the undisputed champ. He claimed £62,137 for 133 appearances and 255 contributions to debate.
His party colleague Irene Adams, the former MP for Paisley North, charged the taxpayer £52,252 for 120 attendances. She made no spoken contribution.
She was one of more than 110 peers who did not make any spoken or written contribution to the House of Lords during the period.
Tory peer Michelle Mone raked in £12,200 for just 44 appearances. She has spoken just twice.
It comes as the next round of peerages is expected to bring the total number of lords to 834, the highest since hereditary peers were cut in 1999.
Boris Johnson has already said he plans on ennobling Ruth Davidson and Tory donors Peter Cruddas and Michael Spencer.
The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has put forward eight candidates for peerages, including Karie Murphy, his former chief of staff, and his former deputy leader, Tom Watson.
READ MORE: Demand for Ruth Davidson to quit as MSP if she accepts peerage
The SNP don’t take their seats in the House of Lords.
Tommy Sheppard, who recently published a report on Scotland’s representation in the upper chamber, said the Lords had “absolutely no place in a modern democracy” as allowing “the Westminster parties to reward selfish donors, cronies and politicians rejected by the voters completely erodes trust in our politics. “
He added: “Allowing peers to profit from their status, without any accountability to the taxpayers who pay for them to live the high-life, is completely undemocratic.
“The House of Lords is quickly becoming a national embarrassment.
“The sooner this undemocratic, out-of-touch institution is abolished, the better.”
Willie Sullivan, a senior director at the Electoral Reform Society, told the Times that the unelected Lords were “taking advantage of the lack of scrutiny in the upper chamber.”
He added: “The Lords is a rolling expenses scandal — and we’ll see this year after year unless there is reform.”
READ MORE: Davidson says she is ready to accept peerage into House of Lords
Donald Dewar’s former spin-doctor James Gordon made no spoken contributions and yet claimed £53,914 in daily allowances and expenses, including more than £2000 on taxis.
However, the former boss of Scottish Radio Holdings told the paper he was on the select committee on communications, and “spoke almost every week.”
Lord Bruce said his high expenses were due to travelling from Aberdeenshire each week. “I get one return flight, but they are expensive,” he said.
“The House of Lords is highly London-centric.”
A spokesperson for the Lords insisted they were ”busy and effective”. They said: “The increase in the costs of House of Lords allowances in the 2018/19 financial year is largely due to a 25% increase in the number of days that the House sat, rising from 129 in 2017/18 to 161 in 2018/19.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel