Public paid £900+ a year for Michael Martin's Sky subscription
As we discovered earlier this year during the row over the Speaker's wife's taxi account, being Speaker is an expensive business. Tonight we've had a little more here showing exactly how expensive.
Between 2006 and 2008, for instance, the Speaker spent £25,772.61 on official entertaining. In 2007 alone, he spent a walloping £15,986.86 on "UK travel and subsistence".
And in both 2006 and 2007, there were £900 plus on "television subscriptions". Looks like the full Sky package there then.
The Speaker does not get the "expenses" directly - payments are made directly from his office and have to be approved by Parliamentary mandarins. So, once again, there are at least as many questions for House of Commons staff....

I've funded him for years, but I can't anymore, he can thank buddy Brown for that.
Maybe it's time for the people who have lost their jobs should call on these fat a***d lazy pigs to do their unselfish bit for the people.
Bitter and angry? You bet!
Posted by: Jane | 21 Nov 2008 14:10:42
Michael Martin is a prime example of being there for the perks rather than wanting to make a difference and serve a purpose. The sooner he retires the better
Posted by: kyle smith | 21 Nov 2008 18:26:13
Disgusting! We are told to tighten our belts but it never seems to extend to politicians.
Posted by: Dave bridge | 21 Nov 2008 22:20:44
Defrocking a vicar is possible..how does one de robe a speaker.In the Gorbals[he doesnt know where they are!]it is possible..but how do the public seek redress against a "poor" speaker?
Posted by: david | 21 Nov 2008 23:50:04
Then they wonder why we do not want to vote?
Posted by: Dorothy | 22 Nov 2008 00:08:34
The great and the good, our betters, certainly know how to enjoy themselves. I'm surprised the man has time for watching Sky. The mess this country is in, you'd think he'd spend every waking hour working on a plan to ameliorate our situation. Some chance. The only way I will vote is to get these fat cats OUT. Hopefully forever.
Posted by: tris | 22 Nov 2008 00:23:53
Martin strike me as bright, unbiased or quick witted. In no way is he either qualified or intelligent enough to collect the huge amount we seem to be paying him to do a less than average job. Yet we cannot remove him, no matter what we do.
I'm afraid Westminster is so rotten it needs complete replacement. Nest-feathering and corruption is absolutely rife. Without a new party, a peoples party, the UK is doomed to repeat the mistakes of this govt. and the last Tory govt.
Posted by: Richard Evans | 22 Nov 2008 00:44:53
Bring on Jeremy C
Posted by: chris s | 22 Nov 2008 06:56:16
I'd be intrigued to know what Mr. Martin gets for £900+ p.a. of our money!
My satellite kit is on Astra 19.2 deg E. Total equipment cost was abt. £50, (not even £50 each and every year, but once only!) There is a choice of hundreds of free digital or analogue programmes , most as good and many far better than the alternative.
What DOES Mr. Martin watch? In Parliamentary language I'd say "he was poorly advised"
Posted by: Doug. Rolph | 22 Nov 2008 10:03:40
Parliament is an open sewer.
Posted by: Chris | 22 Nov 2008 10:31:39
The poverty of the working man has always been organized by those in financial, politial or religious gangs, let them read Shakespear's (The Mearchant of Venice) and take a deep breath.
Posted by: g.robinson | 22 Nov 2008 10:40:15
Why do people want to leave Britain, 'let me count the reasons'. Well, at the trough politicians, and Martin especially. Hazel Blears saying the BNP has prospered because the major political parties have failed the ordinary white working class citizen. (What has she been doing as a cabinet minister the last 15 years?)
The petty vindictive persecution of the individual over trivial misdemeanours. The 'the state knows best' attittude, even now to body snatching for spare parts without your consent. Filling the country to bursting with more mouths to feed and roofs to provide. Tax after tax after tax.1984 is a Barbara Cartland novel compared with Britain today!
I fully understand the feelings of the C16th recusants, robbed of their freedom to worship, as we are robbed of our freedom to be free. This is government of the people, by the government for the governing. We are no longer citizens but economic units, now with a spare parts capacity thrown in. How long before they work out how much body fat can be distilled from a corpse....the gold in your teeth. I can see mountains of pairs of shoes and glasses and human hair....where have I seen this before?
Posted by: dudley holley | 22 Nov 2008 12:36:16
How do we know it was Sky he was watching ? It may have been assorted porn channels !
Posted by: Peter Hooper | 22 Nov 2008 13:06:10
Nothing more than PARASITES!
Posted by: Dave bridge | 22 Nov 2008 13:42:19
What are you all talking about? Stop bloody complaining, you all put him there, he has every bloody right to spend any of our tax money as he wishes (Obviously, approved first). If he wants to watch all of the Sky channels, Let Him. If he wants to travel with Style, Let Him.
*Damn, I sound like many of you anti-british people*
Posted by: Joseph Gibson | 22 Nov 2008 15:34:48
Ooh £900, shocking... Of course, (like most MP's) were he not a public servant the Speaker would probably be in a well paid private sector job with a proper expenses account in addition. MP's really don't earn that much.
It is true that you get the policiticians you deserve and given the rank idiocy and ignorance of many Brits I think we actually have a very good set of politicians.
Posted by: David | 22 Nov 2008 15:53:19
Quote DAVID... "MP's really don't earn that much".
MP's really don't do that much, it's all done from Brussels, we could easily half the number of MP's in this country and no one would know the difference!
Posted by: PeteFergie | 22 Nov 2008 17:35:18
Joseph and David, you seem to be missing the point here. Who NEEDS to spend £900 on TV? No one. You can get a perfectly good digital subscription for a few hundred quid a year plus the initial setup fee.
And I agree with PeteFergie, I don't believe that many MPs do very much.
Posted by: Richy | 22 Nov 2008 20:27:40
The more i read, the more disgusted i get.
Posted by: Graham | 22 Nov 2008 22:11:32
He doesnt seem to care either????
Posted by: Graham | 23 Nov 2008 14:16:18
Don't forget that Micky Mouse Martin will need £900 so that he can cover his Setanta subscription, Box office Movies and Sports Events; who knows perhaps he's a closet dirty old man who uses public money to pay for the multiple 'Adult' television channels.
Either way, it's a disgrace; Martin is of Labour origin, so really this public money scandal all fits together.
I want change. Why should the USA monopolise the opportunity?!!!
For this reason, I am going to vote Conservative - ONE MORE TIME.
If when they are in Government there is no enforced change in the shameful behavior of politicians, then I'm going to find a way of leaving the UK - for now NOTHING can be worse than Labour.
Right now, Gordon Brown is a Circus Clown leading a Circus Government.................
Posted by: Drew | 23 Nov 2008 18:34:45
this is ridicolous! talk about the public paying for the MP's to do live a life of luxury! i dont even earn $25k a year, then i get robbed by tax, and this guy is splashing $25k on what, parties? parties for who? who can a public speaker entertain? and why so much?
Posted by: liam b | 23 Nov 2008 19:31:53
Martin should have been hoofed out long ago.
Corruption looks after its own.
Posted by: Robert | 23 Nov 2008 22:20:12
Martin is a self serving vile scumbag. Like all politicians he is serving himself to the point of obscenity. Why do we actually need this bunch of b******s ?
Posted by: | 24 Nov 2008 05:53:48
When are we going to find out just exactly what these pigs at the trough have been helping themselves to? I'm sure I read somewhere that their expenses were going to be published or was that just another lie?
Posted by: Kate | 24 Nov 2008 08:41:59