Bank of England scandal: expenses déjà vu?

Over a three-month period, how much would your travel and transport expenses amount to?

£50? £500? Maybe even £5,000? I doubt it would come anywhere close to the staggering £50,000 bill Mark Carney, Governor at the Bank of England, recently racked up.

And unfortunately, the Bank of England's incident isn’t a one-off. Back in 2016, MPs were still submitting petty expense claims – my favourite was a 40p toilet brush.

Then earlier this year, an FoI investigation revealed Britain’s highest paid vice-chancellor, Professor Dame Glynis Breakwell, claimed dozens of first class train journeys and flights on expenses in 2017, paid for using students’ and taxpayers’ money.

It's clear some public sector bodies haven’t learnt their lessons from the 2009 MP expenses scandal and the infamous £1,600 duck island, as it's still one rule for the private sector, and another for the public sector when it comes to expenses.

Indeed, after the 2009 scandal, politicians promised a complete reform of their process and said they would address three key areas: transparency, rules and culture. Fast-forward eight years and little has changed in the rules and culture for politicians and other public sector departments.

Of course, there are legitimate claims made. And like any employee in the private sector, public servants, like Carney, are entitled to claim for anything work-related.

But just because you can claim something, doesn't mean you should. The Bank of England’s employees may have been following the rules, but in an era of austerity and when businesses are delaying decisions, hires and investments due to Brexit uncertainty, senior members of staff should show greater self-awareness. ave no doubt Carney’s diary is jam-packed with meetings across the world. But with an eye-watering total of £50,000, just covering travel expenditure, how much thought – if any – has he or his team given to finding the best deal?

What's more, this behaviour has a trickle-down effect, permeating the entire organisation. If employees see their boss taking a flippant attitude to the organisation’s expenditure, why should they bother in taking the time to save the Bank of England money?

Something’s got to give

In the private sector, expense policies vary greatly. On the one hand, you’ve got some firms who use tools to monitor what employees are spending on.

Then on the other hand, many policies are formed on the basis of trust, whereby businesses don't even have a formal policy in place. Most business owners trust their employees to treat business expenditure as they would their own money. But this clearly isn’t the cultural norm for some senior staff n the public sector. And it should be a norm being led by the top down.

The current public sector expenses process is archaic and problematic for two reasons. First, how can we analyse the spending of government if we have to sift through 16,000 line IPSA spreadsheets every quarter, for example? With many tools on the market automating these jobs, the fact spreadsheets are still used seems ludicrous.

Second, how can we expect these busy individuals to sit down after hours and file away for stationary and mileage? I've spoken to care workers travelling around the country who have to drive all the way back to the office after a job just to submit an expense claim because it's paper-based. To highlight this level of bureaucracy, the official IPSA mileage submission document for politicians is over four pages long.

Overall, this incident cements the need for the expenses process in the public sector to be consistent, simplified and brought into line with modern life and business practice. Taxpayers need transparency, visibility and accountability over what is being claimed for and why, when it comes to their money. Simple.

Dafydd Llewellyn is managing director of UK and France SMB at SAP Concur