Some Lords 'would like sick pay'

Peers make laws, conduct judicial work and check on the government

Some peers want pensions and sick pay, wrongly believing their allowance for attending the House of Lords is a salary, a report has said.

The Senior Salaries Review Body found some did not understand the "basic principle" they did not get paid.

The attendance allowance system - up to £308 a day - means peers can claim up to £37,000 a year tax-free.

The review body rejected "fundamental" changes to the system, saying it should be considered as part of wider reforms.

Under the current rules peers are entitled to up to £79.50 a day for meals and travel, plus £159.50 a night for accommodation and £69 a day for secretarial and research support.

These sums are not taxed, no receipts are required, and they apply to every occasion when a peer attends Parliament.

If a peer were to claim the full amount for all 120 sitting days a year they would be taking home the same amount as someone with a taxable salary of about £50,000.

The arrangement is "intended to reimburse all out-of-pocket expenses arising from attendance at the House".

The SSRB said "a number of members" had requested changes to the rules so they could be recompensed for "loss of earnings and the introduction of pension and sick-pay arrangements".

But "such arrangements would be contrary to the basic principle of membership [of] not being remunerated", the review stated.

'Winners and losers'

Some peers had also argued that they should be able to claim for "additional items", where they had spent more than the flat-rate - on transport, hotels or food, for instance.

"As a matter of principle, we disagree with the proposition that these approaches could be mixed," the SSRB said.

"The flat-rate approach is simple and convenient, but inevitably runs the risk of creating winners and losers," it added.

However, it said switching to a flexible expenses policy - where receipts would need to be provided, as is the case with MPs in the Commons - was not "sensible".

Any "fundamental" changes to the system of allowances should be considered as part of wider reforms of the Lords and not before, the SSRB added.