Conservative London Assembly member Brian Coleman has often been in the news over the years for his expense claims (not to mention his attempt to ban questions of himself), so I hesitate slightly to says it is “news” that new figures from the London Fire Brigade show him topping the list of expense claims:
| Assembly Member | ||
| Brian Coleman | April 2010 to March 2011 | £3,480.20 |
| Darren Johnson | April 2010 to March 2011 | £0.00 |
| Gareth Bacon | April 2010 to March 2011 | £0.00 |
| Mike Tuffrey | April 2010 to March 2011 | £0.00 |
| Murad Qureshi | April 2010 to March 2011 | £0.00 |
| Navin Shah | April 2010 to March 2011 | £0.00 |
| Richard Tracey | April 2010 to March 2011 | £23.96 |
| Tony Arbour | April 2010 to March 2011 | £378.86 |
Full details are over on the London Fire Brigade website, which also lists the expense claims from all the other members of the body. You’ll see some other familiar Liberal Democrat names there to go with Mike Tuffrey in the above list – Caroline Pidgeon (whose own views on Brian Coleman The Voice carried last year) and local councillors Terry Stacy and Ed Butcher. They’ve all got expense claims of £0.
UPDATE: Matthew Harris, over in Brian Coleman’s Barnet patch, has also blogged about his expense claims, including links to further coverage. Matthew’s post about Brian Coleman is here.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Tens of Thousands
A Puffin Books profile of Joan Aiken
"Could you be the one to help a care leaver?"
Latest voting intention and leadership ratings opinion polls
Legacy of the 204 bus service #dundeewestend
Green party candidate tries to evict Labour opponent
Michael BG
Thelma Davies
Daniel Stylianou
Joseph Bourke
Ricky Treadwell
10 Comments
Something should be done to tackle the amount of taxpayers’ money he claims. I am sure it’s all within the rules, but then the rules should be changed. If most Assembly Members can get by without claiming anything then so can he.
Come on this is a bit lazy considering there is no context to the figures – I claimed more than that at work last year for expenses and I don’t flog myself about it… if the amount claimed was for genuine matters related to his work I have no problems – I am actually more suspicious of members claiming nothing at all – are they being morally superior or just did doing nothing at all last year? (I’m sure that’s not true either but you see what I mean….).
I agree with peebee. I sense that there are obvious conclusions to jump to here, but I have no idea whether it is fair to do so.
Why does he need to use taxis so often? Surely the tube would be cheaper.
Another issue is the congestion charge, if you choose to travel by car rather than alternative transport then surely the congestion charge should be at your own expense.
Peebee and Geoffrey – there is context to these figures if you look at what he’s claiming for. London Assembly Members are entitled to free travel cards and the area Brian Coleman represents (Camden and Barnet), City Hall and Parliament have excellent transport links. Fire Authority meetings are held at Union St round the corner from City Hall, about a 5-10 minute walk away, so there is no need to take taxis there, unless of course you had some physical impairment which meant you were unable to. As far as I know, Brian Coleman has no such impairment.
One claim is £18 for a taxi from Parliament to Cockspur St, a distance of less than a mile. Could he not have walked this distance? Or got on a bus and paid the £2.20 fare (£1.30 with Oyster) There is no excuse to claim all these taxi fares or to drive his car and claim mileage and congestion charge. If a bike and the tube is good enough for Boris it should be good enough for Brian and if not he should pay for his own taxi fares.
Anna – now this all makes sense. Confirms what I have always thought about the Tories.
@ Anna Yes – that’s fair enough – if I worked in London there would be no need to take taxis- just pay for a travel card all day – easy enough to write that into an expenses policy (I always wonder why this seems just so difficult) – on the other hand I’m still amazed that some members claim nothing at all!
@on the other hand I’m still amazed that some members claim nothing at all!
If it’s anything at all similar to councillors representing their council here on Merseyside on Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority, it’ll be because they receive a basic allowance each year plus extras depending on special responsibilities (eg chairing a committee, leading a political group etc). Also as it’s classed as an “approved duty” here councillors can claim expenses related to attending meetings eg mileage allowance etc from their respective council.
Councilors on Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority receive an extra ~£10,000 or so in allowances + expenses.
For example, councillors on the Merseyside Police Authority get an extra £10-£11 thousand a year plus extra amounts if they chair a committee.
Councillors on Merseytravel (the Merseyside transport authority) received an extra £1200 (a councillor who was on it for three months) to over £54,000 extra for the Chair.
If the expenses/allowances system is anything similar in London, I think this may explain (especially after the MP expenses issue) why councillors already in receipt of generous allowances would not then choose to claim expenses on top of them.
It’s possible they’re either not claiming, not claiming from the outside body or claiming from the body they’re elected to so it doesn’t appear on the above list. Hope that helps!
@ John Brace – a font of wisdom thanks!