Robert Galvin, a British accountant who looked over the EU’s books, found a discrepancy of £81 million in “personal entitlement” payments to EU civil servants in 2006, and saw there was “considerable risk” of further abuses. For the EU to misuse taxpayers’ money like this is simply unacceptable.

David Lidington, the Minister for Europe, has responded to the findings by saying that “reports such as these are worrying and further emphasise the need for increased transparency across all EU institutional budgets”.

That’s very easy for him to say, but will anyone ever really be held to account for these failings? I fear we all know the answer to that one, given the EU’s record on dealing with financial mismanagement.

It’s not as if this is the first financial controversy to hit the European Union. In 1999, the entire European Commission, then led by Jacques Santer, resigned following a report “exposing fraud, corruption and mismanagement at senior levels”. While then-Shadow Foreign Secretary (and now Cabinet Office Minister) Francis Maude said that “British taxpayers need to be protected from being short-changed in Europe”, it is a disgrace that this warning still applies today.

Last year the European Court of Auditors refused to sign off the EU’s accounts. For the 16th year in a row. Yes, that’s right – EU accounts haven’t been cleared for 16 years. The two largest areas of EU expenditure – agriculture and regional spending – continue to be “materially affected by error”. Yet the Brussels machine still has the audacity to be demanding even more of our money.

I have previously written about how Members of the European Parliament and EU civil servants don’t seem to live in the real world – and they don’t seem like returning to reality any time soon.

MPs will today vote on a motion to give the British people a say on our relationship with the European Union for the first time in over 36 years. Given the waste that continues to come from Brussels (and Strasbourg), can they afford not to listen to the people?

Lord Hanningfield (pictured), the former leader of Essex County Council, falsely claimed nearly £14,000 for staying in London when he was not there; on one occasion he was in fact on a flight to India. Lord Taylor of Warwick falsely claimed over £ 11,000 for a house in Oxford that he did not live in. Both of these men stole money from taxpayers and lied when confronted with evidence of their crimes.

Three former MPs jailed over their parliamentary expenses – David Chaytor, Eric Illsley and Jim Devine – have already been released. Now that these two peers are also out it means almost all of those convicted over their parliamentary expenses have been let out after serving barely a quarter of their sentences (Elliot Morley was moved from rough Wandsworth prison to a softer open prison in within weeks of being locked up and could also be in line for an early release).

The length of the sentences the expenses cheats served is important. It is about more than just any perceived danger to the public. It is key that their time inside reflects the impact and seriousness of their crimes. The taxpayers they stole from need to see that justice has been done and that it is not one rule for politicians and another rule for the rest of us. A large part of the expenses scandal was a result of some politicians believing they were somehow ‘above the law’. The jail time served needs to dispel this myth and act as a proper deterrent for any future would-be expenses cheat.

It remains to be seen if these two Lords have understood the gravity of their actions or the damage they have done. The continued presence of convicted criminals, who stole taxpayers’ money, in the House of Lords is totally unacceptable. The public must be left wondering what the deterrent is for stealing thousands of pounds from taxpayers.

The expenses cheats should have served more of their sentences to help restore public faith in Parliament after it was so badly damaged by the expenses scandal. Many voters will not think that justice has been served following these lightweight punishments.

Includes full breakdown for every local council

Click here to read the full report

The only comprehensive guide to top pay at UK local councils, with detailed breakdowns for each council included

Record 2,295 council staff earned over £100,000 in 2009-10 (up 18 per cent on 2008-09)

We proudly presents the fifth Town Hall Rich List, the ‘Who’s Who’ of local government fat cats, detailing all those whose remuneration exceeds £100,000.

Since the first Town Hall Rich List in 2007, the number of senior staff receiving such large sums has soared and the latest list shows that trend continuing. Executive pay in town halls across the UK has continued to be insulated from economic reality, despite the urgent need to find savings and many councils claiming they are being forced to cut services because they are getting less money from central government.

The Town Hall Rich List 2011 reveals the names, job titles and full remuneration of all local council employees earning over £100,000 for the financial year 2009-10. The full report can be read here and includes detailed breakdowns for each council.

Click here to see the full report

Click here for the press release

Key findings

• There were 2,295 council employees receiving total remuneration in excess of £100,000 in 2009-10, an increase of 18 per cent on the previous year’s 1,941. This may partly be explained by a rise in the number receiving significant redundancy payments
• 48 council employees received remuneration over £250,000 in 2009-10, up from 19 in 2008-09
• 506 council employees received remuneration between £150,000 and £249,999 in 2009-10, up from 408 in 2008-09
• The average total remuneration increase for staff in the Town Hall Rich list and in post for both full years from 2008-09 to 2009-10 was 3.8 per cent
• The councils with the most employees in receipt of remuneration over £100,000 in 2009-10 were Cornwall and Newcastle upon Tyne , both with 32 taking the crown from Kent in the previous year, who this year report 31

Matthew Sinclair, Director of The TaxPayers’ Alliance, said:

“Councils should be scouring every inch of their expenditure to identify savings, so taxpayers will be staggered that so many council employees are still getting such a generous deal. Councils insist cuts can only mean pressure on frontline services but they clearly have money to spend when it comes to paying their own senior staff. It is crucial that some of these senior council executives set an example and ensure they have the moral authority to lead spending cuts by taking a pay cut themselves. Households have seen their Council Tax bills double over the last decade and deserve better value. Proper transparency is an essential first step so that residents can decide for themselves if town hall bosses are delivering the results to justify pay at these sorts of levels.”

As reported in the Mail Online, a civil servant, Anthony Snow, who earned £107,000 a year, travelled in a chauffeur-driven Mercedes limousine paid for by taxpayers. The trip that cost taxpayers £464 allowed Mr Snow – who was in a position to sign off his own expenses - the opportunity to travel to a conference entitled ‘More For Less – Meeting The Challenges Of A Changed Environment’. The irony being that the conference was intended to teach those attending how to save public money.

However this is nothing in comparison to what has been reported in the Belfast Telegraph. Sir Hugh Orde, the former Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), received business class flights for his family for nearly six years. Sir Hugh was paid more than £180,000 a year and received various perks, including paid for accommodation, and spent almost £30,000 of taxpayers’ money on flights between Belfast, Dublin and London. This was initially put into place so to encourage his adjustment to the role in Northern Ireland but due to an administrative error continued far beyond the agreed twelve month period.

Mr Snow is an individual who has had a number of questions raised about his intentions, including the pension package that was agreed upon the same week he qualified for early retirement and his move to the ‘Financial Reporting Council’ in 2009. Mr Orde is currently the President of the Association of Chief Police Officers.

These are just two examples of those in receipt of extravagant salaries exploiting the system and leaving taxpayers out of pocket. There are examples of this throughout the town halls and other public institutions nationwide. These two public servants should apologize to taxpayers, and repay money back from extravagant expenses’ claims. Others guilty of similar exploits should be held accountable for their misdemeanors.