Exclusive: Lord Brookman among dozens not to speak, raising fresh questions about the chamber

This article is more than 1 year old

This article is more than 1 year old

A Labour peer claimed almost £50,000 in attendance and travel expenses covering every single day the House of Lords was sitting last year, despite never speaking or asking any written questions, a Guardian investigation reveals.

The former trade union general secretary David Brookman was among dozens of other lords and baronesses who never took part in a single debate, while almost a third of the 800 peers barely participated in parliamentary business over a 12-month period despite costing almost £3.2m in allowances.

The details have emerged from a new analysis of public data that will raise fresh questions about the size and effectiveness of the Lords, and the funds that can be claimed by those who fail to regularly contribute.

'It's chaos': how Brexit crisis is paralysing the House of Lords Read more

The findings show:

Eighty-eight peers – about one in nine - never spoke, held a government post or participated in a committee at all.

Forty-six peers did not register a single vote, including on Brexit, sit on a committee or hold a post. One peer claimed £25,000 without voting, while another claimed £41,000 but only voted once.

More than 270 peers claimed more than £40,000 in allowances, with two claiming more than £70,000.

The former Lords speaker Frances D’Souza, a long-term advocate of reform, said the findings corroborated “what everyone suspects is going on”, and that a minority of peers risked discrediting the hard work of their colleagues.

“There’s clearly a need to reduce numbers,” Lady D’Souza said, adding that the research “clearly shows there are people who are attending the House of Lords who are not contributing, and therefore they are simply redundant”.

The Guardian’s analysis covers the attendance, participation and allowances claims of 785 lords serving for a full year between 2017 and 2018. They comprise 244 Conservatives, 196 Labour and 97 Liberal Democrats, as well as 248 crossbench peers and various others.

The Lords plays a crucial role in scrutinising government legislation, but its critics have long complained the chamber is bloated, anachronistic and inefficient.

Peers are mostly appointed by the prime minister of the day. About 100 peers are former senior members of the judiciary, Church of England bishops, or aristocrats who inherited their seats.

The findings also showed that peers were much more likely to attend frequently than infrequently: 300 attended on more than 80% of possible days, with 15 peers attending for 157 days, the maximum number reported.

They include the former chair of the Labour party’s national executive committee Dianne Hayter, who holds four frontbench posts including Labour Brexit spokesperson in the Lords. She spoke on nearly half the days she attended, while also serving on the liaison committee, which manages the business of the upper chamber.

But attendance data alone can be misleading because some peers rarely or never participate in parliamentary business despite attending frequently.

The steel company magnate Swraj Paul attended on 157 days and claimed more than £47,000 of allowances, but only spoke once. He did not serve on a committee, though has done in the past.

Lord Paul said there was no requirement in the rules for lords to participate in order to claim allowances. “I take a lot of interest in the House of Lords, but there is a lot more to be done than making speeches,” he said. Asked for an example, he replied: “Thinking, etc, and giving my point of view to colleagues.”

Lord Brookman also attended 157 days but never spoke and did not serve on a committee, though he did regularly vote. He did not respond to an invitation to comment.

About a third of lords – 245 – contributed infrequently, holding no committee roles or frontbench posts and speaking on only seven days or fewer. Eighty-eight of their number never spoke.

Nick Houghton, a former chief of defence staff who joined the Lords in November 2017, was one of a small number of peers to rarely or never vote.

Lord Houghton said he never voted because he had spent his first six months in the Lords familiarising himself with the chamber’s procedures. “I do not consider myself an expert on the intricacies of EU withdrawal,” he said. “I plan to be selective on the debates I contribute to and the votes I make.”

Unlike MPs, who receive an annual salary, peers are entitled to a daily allowance of £305, in part because they are expected to work part time. Those who do not attend are not entitled to the allowance.

The allowance system has been criticised because it allows peers to claim money for attending without necessarily making a contribution. Parliamentary staff note peers’ attendance when they arrive, but no record is kept of how soon after that they depart.

The median allowance claim by peers was £30,180, though some peers claimed substantially more than that through more frequent attendance or through travel expenses.

A spokesperson for the House of Lords said: “Members of the House of Lords are not full-time politicians, but they do bring a wealth of experience and expertise from outside parliament. As with MPs, not all the work that members undertake is visible – – much of it is done behind the scenes, researching issues and meeting campaigners and members of the public.”

The spokesperson added: “Members are responsible for ensuring that claims they make are in accordance with the rules contained in the code of conduct. If no parliamentary work is undertaken, no money should be claimed. The large majority of members take these duties seriously and undertake them with diligence.”

Q&A How was the research carried out? Show Hide The project covers the period between 1 September 2017 and 31 August 2018, and covers peers who could submit daily attendance allowances in that time period. Data was gathered from three official sources: Claims for daily attendance allowances and travel costs by members of the House of Lords are published on the parliamentary website

Peers’ names, political parties, information on committee roles, and members’ interests were gathered from each peer’s biography on the parliamentary website

Speaking and voting records were taken from each peer’s contributions page on Hansard The list includes all peers listed on the claims for daily attendance allowances and travel costs by members of the House of Lords in the time period covered as published on the parliamentary website. This includes those peers on a leave of absence either for part or all of the time period covered. Those who retired or died partway through the period were excluded.

Flights

Peers are permitted to claim for business-class flights to and from parliament.

The largest claim for attendance and travel expenses was from the former Labour minister Jack Cunningham, who chairs one of the chamber’s most important committees scrutinising secondary legislation. He claimed £75,122 for 154 days’ attendance, £23,108 of which was for air travel.

Receipts obtained through freedom of information requests suggest Lord Cunningham took dozens of flights to and from London. It is not clear whether or not Cunningham travelled business class.

Additional reporting by Olga Chen Cheng and Amelia Clarke

• This article was amended on 31 May 2019 to clarify that former members of the judiciary sit in the House of Lords, but serving members are disqualified.