Peter Robinson: expenses row
Friday, 8 May 2009
First Minister Peter Robinson has hit out strongly against criticism of his expenses — and revealed that he has turned down better-paid jobs outside politics.
The DUP leader also said he was not prepared to employ by open competition.
He made his comments in a tersely-worded email to a member of the public, which has been passed on the blog site Slugger O’Toole.
Mr Robinson has faced criticism in recent weeks over the remuneration from his Stormont and House of Commons jobs.
His letter stated: “When I entered politics I took a reduction in salary in order to serve my community.
“I have twice been offered employment in the private sector at salaries significantly more attractive than that which I presently receive for a job that has required a much greater sacrifice in time and stress. I do the job I do because I am in politics because of conviction.”
The First Minister and his politician wife employ all three of their children and a daughter-in-law from their office-running allowances.
His letter said: “I make no apology for employing my own family and those who are the family of friends. I have been an elected representative for more than 30 years and have worked through the conflict that our society has faced. Those who work in my office know where I am and when I will attend meetings and events. I am not prepared to employ by open competition.
“My life depends on those who I have around me but even if it were not so, there are distinct advantages in employing those who are completely loyal and in tune with the position I adopt.”
Critics have pointed out that the pay and allowances received by Mr and Mrs Robinson from their Assembly and Commons jobs add up to more than £550,000.
His letter said: “Is this a sexist suggestion that my wife should not be an MP because I am an MP or the equally ludicrous suggestion that she should earn less and spend less in serving her constituents because she is married to an MP?”
Mr Robinson also hit out at “inaccurate trash” and “nonsense” in the press about his expenses.
The person who wrote the critical letter to the DUP leader had suggested that MPs should not also be MLAs and councillors
Mr Robinson’s reply stated: “In principal this is a sensible position to adopt. My only caveat is that it was felt essential by all the political parties that the most experienced politicians should be in the Assembly in its early years to assist in bedding down the institutions.”
--
Email in full
> > From: Rebekah Robinson
> Sent: 29 April 2009 10:45
> To:
> Subject: Re: Your email to Peter Robinson MP MLA
> >
> I have been asked to pass on the following from The Rt Hon Peter
> Robinson MP MLA:
> >
> >
> > Dear XXXXXXX
>
> >
> I note the comments in your email. It might be better to look at
> the facts rather than repeating the nonsense in the press. Do you
> believe that an elected representative should be available to those
> who elect him/her?
> > Should constituents be able to contact their MP when in need?
> Parliament believes they should and if you agree then an office is
> necessary and so is staffing. Parliament has set the level for this
> function and I note that my wife and I claimed less than any other
> Northern Ireland MP.
> >
> > Why do you add my wife’s salary and expenses to mine. Is this a
> sexist suggestion that my wife should not be an MP because I am an
> MP or the equally ludicrous suggestion that she should earn less and
> spend less in serving her constituents because she is married to an
> MP. As for the preposterous proposition that somehow the expenses
> of my wife for running Strangford should be added to mine for
> running East Belfast - are the people of East Belfast to travel to
> Ards or Comber to visit advice centres? These expenses are paid out
> directly by the House of Commons and are not sent to the MP. The
> suggestion that this equates to income for the MP is deliberate
> deceit.
> >
> > So why do you add the cost of running constituency offices to our
> income?
> > In no other area of life would you do so. Do you suggest that the
> cost of running a doctor’s surgery including staff should be equated
> to the doctor’s income? To do so for MP’s is mischievous and
> dishonest. I suspect that the newspaper editors who for newspaper
> sales like lurid headline, no matter how fraudulent, do not add the
> salaries of their secretaries and assistants or the costs of renting
> offices, heating and lighting etc along with their own salary when
> talking about their income but hypocritically they do so when
> writing about MPs.
> >
> > I intend to continue to provide the people of East Belfast with the
> best services that I can in spite of the rubbish in the newspapers.
> I am glad that only two people have written to me about this issue.
> It gives me encouragement that so few are fooled into believing the
> inaccurate trash in some papers.
> >
> > There were three other issues raised in some reports which I will
> also take the opportunity to comment upon even though you did not
> raise them (but in case you read them). Firstly it was suggested
> that someone who is an MP should not be an Assembly Member or
> Councillor. In principal this is a sensible position to adopt. My
> only caveat is that it was felt essential by all the political
> parties that the most experienced politicians should be in the
> Assembly in its early years to assist in bedding down the
> institutions.
> > I expect that this dual mandate position will be phased out by all the
> > parties as the Assembly stabilises. Some time ago all the political
> > parties committed themselves in an Assembly Committee to this course
> of action. I can assure you that working 16 hour days to carry out
> all the work needing to be done is not something I want to long
> continue.
> >
> > The other issue related to the employment of family members by
> elected representatives. I make no apology for employing my own
> family and those who are the family of friends. I have been an
> elected representative for more than thirty years and have worked
> through the conflict that our society has faced. Those who work in
> my office know where I am and when I will attend meetings and
> events. I am not prepared to employ by open competition.
> > My life depends on those who I have around me but even if it were
> not so there are distinct advantages in employing those who are
> completely loyal and in tune with the position I adopt. The
> critical requirement here is that the people employed are capable of
> doing the job and actually give the time to do it. On both of these
> counts I am satisfied I have the right people working for me. I
> only add that when my daughter carried a parcel bomb with ball-
> bearings attached to the explosives out of my office I didn’t see
> anyone queuing up for her job and when my son opened a letter bomb
> at my home there was nobody pushing him out of the way to take over.
> >
> > References have been made to the Second Home Allowance. My home is
> in Northern Ireland and when I am staying in London clearly I need
> suitable accommodation. I have no problem what scheme the House of
> Commons adopts for the payment of this accommodation. I shall
> continue to operate within the rules. As far as the actual Second
> Home costs of staying in London are concerned it is apportioned
> between my wife and myself.
> >
> > I am more than happy that we have transparency in how elected
> representatives are remunerated but I believe you and I both have a
> right to expect honest reporting of the facts.
> >
> > When I entered politics I took a reduction in salary in order to
> serve my community. I have twice been offered employment in the
> private sector at salaries significantly more attractive than that
> which I presently receive for a job that has required a much greater
> sacrifice in time and stress. I do the job I do because I am in
> politics because of conviction. You may not share my views but I am
> in politics to serve, to the best of my ability, and have never once
> put remuneration before duty. My family has sacrificed more than
> you and others will ever know and I deeply resent the suggestion
> that money has been the motivating factor.
> >
> > As for your comment, “I am not sure if you are aware but there is
> currently a recession on”. Perhaps next time you decide to look at
> the BBC web site you might look for the many meetings I have had
> with banks, energy companies, business and community organisations
> about the economic downturn.
> > I have travelled the globe trying to encourage companies to come to
> Northern Ireland to bring jobs here and I have placed the recession
> on the agenda of every Executive meeting. Recently I chaired the
> first meeting of the Cross Sector Advisory Forum which is bringing
> forward recommendations as to how we can best take Northern Ireland
> through the downturn. Yes, I am aware of the recession and I have
> and intend to continue to do all that I can to deal with its impact
> on those I serve.
> >
> >
> > Yours sincerely
> >
> > Peter Robinson
> >
> >
> > I trust this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Best wishes
> > Ms Rebekah Robinson
> Office Manager & Private Secretary to
> The Rt Hon Peter Robinson MP MLA
Post a comment
Limit: 500 characters
View all comments that have been posted about this article
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP address logged and may be used to prevent further submissions. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by BelfastTelegraph.co.uk's Terms of Use.
Posts submitted in UPPERCASE letters will be rejected.





















Comments
21 Comments
Both you and your wife were elected to represent everyone including the working class people of northern ireland who earn less in a year than you claim in exspenses. You say that you have brought the recession on the agenda of every meeting maybe if you were effected by it you would be alot more humble. How can anyone vote for any polition!!!!
Posted by alan s | 20.05.09, 23:10 GMT
to be fair, peter robinson is correct...... and i'm not exactly a DUP supporter. if someone is willing to lead a political party or government then they ought to be compensated......despite what the press think
the media have a habit of influencing public perception...sometimes its wise to read between the lines.
Posted by willie reed | 09.05.09, 21:50 GMT
File Peter Robinson's reply under 'Essays in Arrogance'. His reply and his general demeanour are the personification of arrogance.
Posted by Dot | 09.05.09, 13:42 GMT
peter robinson tends to cloud over the issue nobody is trying to suggest that his wife is not a separate issue ,,let me spell it out in a simple way ,,all mlas should retire at 65 and no mlas should employ family members (hope iam not going to fast ) in all mlas office in n ireland they employ family members its a disgrace and as i have stated before ,,greed is cross comunity ,,the amount of public representation in this country for a population of 1.75 million people is stagering but the post troubles gravy train will continue its the nature of the beast
Posted by hugh glenn | 09.05.09, 13:11 GMT
What an aggressive and confrontational response this is. Rather than take the opportunity to address the perfectly legitimate matters raised, Peter Robinson shows nothing but contempt and disdain for one of the electorate.
Posted by John | 09.05.09, 09:15 GMT
Offered better paying jobs! . I doubt that he and his family would have been better off if he had decided to get employment outside of politics.
Posted by RMS | 08.05.09, 17:42 GMT
Good on you Peter,you know we have always had cranks trying to run Ulster from their chair beside the fire. You are doing a good job keep up the good work
regards Jim Brown
Posted by James Brown | 08.05.09, 17:21 GMT
The individual who released this obviously doesn't do trust. Mr Robinson is 100% in his comments. This media witch hunt is getting quite tiring. As if the media is squeaky clean.
Posted by Roberta | 08.05.09, 17:11 GMT
If Peter Robinson was offered better paid jobs why does he not tell us what they were?
If he is able to do both jobs then clearly neither is a full time job yet both pay what the vast majority in Northern Ireland would consider to be more than a full time salary.
Finally is the DUP so bereft of talent that we now have Nigel Dodds wife running for election to the European parliament?
Posted by mcasson | 08.05.09, 17:02 GMT
i totally understand the frustration Robinson must feel at the media lumping his expenses and his wifes together. it is unfair and it shouldn't be forgotten that they are the MPs who claim the least in Northern Ireland
Posted by Andy Mac | 08.05.09, 16:25 GMT
Peter Robinson has devoted his life to Northern Ireland and i wonder how many other people would sign their lives over to governing??? Never at home - probably missing important family occassions etc etc it can't be easy.
I can understand the need to update out of date rules and regulations but as Robinson says he hasn't broken any rules or laws.
Good on him for responding directly to constituents after all many get slagged for not doing this - but no doubt some eegit will chime in with "has he nothing better to do"
you can't win i tell you!
Posted by Gareth | 08.05.09, 15:44 GMT
If he can,t take the heat he should get out of the kitchen.No one is holding a gun to his head to make him stay in the job .Let him take a job in the private sector
Posted by KIERAN | 08.05.09, 15:27 GMT
Quite concerned that my local MP and our First Minister does not know the difference between 'principal' and the word he meant 'principle'
Posted by SW | 08.05.09, 15:26 GMT
I'll tell you one thing, it's actually hard to argue against what Peter Robinson is saying. I live in East Belfast and his office have helped me on three occasions.
The media are hardly squeaky clean yet have the bare faced cheek to continue to throw mud at others.
Posted by The Blether | 08.05.09, 15:17 GMT
Its always one rule for them and one rule for the rest of us. Surely being a MLA is a full time job, especially being the First Minister, and I would suspect that a MP's job would be full time too. Methinks "Robbo" is the most over worked man in all of NI, poor him.
Posted by Homer | 08.05.09, 15:12 GMT
I have to say Robbo is 100% right on this one. If I lived under constant threat I wouldn't operate an open recrutiment policy.
Shame on the person who leaked this to the press. Obviously they don't do 'in confidence' or 'trust'.
Posted by Robbie Waters | 08.05.09, 14:59 GMT
From your knowledge Grace A are we to presume you are his personal accountant or just another DUP apologist / activist? If it were not for the ongoing Paisley rent issue that is based on generous claims made by another family then you may have a fair point but alas human nature is cynical and the above affair flames the smouldering fire.
Posted by Zoon Politikon | 08.05.09, 14:44 GMT
Who was the other lucrative job with?
Its a ridiculous amount to claim, end off there can be no justification for this family monopoly.
Posted by MiHe | 08.05.09, 14:30 GMT
Peter Robinson hits the nail on the head. It is totally misleading to make out an MPs income as consisting of salary and expenses - when in reality he never gets the money for office rent, payment of staff etc.
Posted by Grace A | 08.05.09, 14:19 GMT
Dontch just love the reinforcing end by Rebekah:
"trust this satisfactory."
Yes thanks, very!
Posted by Pete | 08.05.09, 13:56 GMT
21 Comments