Employees Travelling Outside the UK: Expenses Rate

John Milne Excerpts

Tuesday 14th July 2026 Westminster Hall

[Peter Lamb (Crawley) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered expenses rates for employees travelling outside the UK.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. I am calling on the Government to ensure that serious consideration is given to reassessing the scale rates for expenses and subsistence paid to employees who by nature of their work are required to travel outside the UK. My constituency of Crawley is home to Gatwick airport and many workers, including pilots and cabin crew, who are required to spend considerable time abroad with the flights they crew. That can last from several hours to several days for those working long-haul flights.

Time spent away from home in foreign cities, without access to kitchens or other domestic utilities, can be overwhelmingly expensive, particularly for junior members of the cabin crew, whose salaries, according to the National Careers Service, begin at around £19,000. It is right, therefore, that employers pay tax-deductible subsistence payments to their employees, to cover the costs associated with travel necessary to do their jobs.

Under the previous Government, to save companies having to check every single receipt that an employee accrues while abroad, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs introduced a benchmark expenses rates for employees travelling outside the UK. Those were first published on the Government’s website in 2013, with unique rates produced for almost every one of the world’s major cities, setting out the average cost of drinks, breakfast, lunch and dinner, a night in a hotel room and even the journey from hotel to office. Each city had also been given broader non-specific subsistence reimbursement rates. Demarcated across specific time boundaries, that is a rate for when employees spent more than five hours in a given city, with another for when they spent more than 10 or 24 hours there.

The detailed task of producing those rates over a decade ago is evidenced by the fact that HMRC went to the effort of making unique assessments city by city, and that the increase in reimbursement between five, 10 and 24 hours is not only non-linear but unique to each city. Despite the time and effort put into producing those bespoke rates, they have been upgraded significantly only once in the past 13 years—in October 2014, a year after they were first produced—and that only included a fraction of the cities listed.

Despite assurances that the Government keep under review all taxes, including overseas subsistence rates, if we check their website, we see that rates payable to an employee who has travelled to Zagreb for work are listed in Croatian kuna, even though Croatia joined the euro on 1 January 2023. The subsistence rates for at least 15 European capitals, including Athens, Madrid, Lisbon and Dublin, have never received an update. Due to more than a decade of inflation, those benchmark values have been eroded in real terms.

Ahead of this debate, using the total residual rates produced in 2013, and nation-specific consumer price index inflation figures from the World Bank Group, we have calculated today’s expected subsistence rates for European destinations. Amsterdam’s total residual rate in 2013 was set at €71; a year later it was raised to €72, where it remains today. According to World Bank Group data, prices in the Netherlands in the 12 years since have risen by an average of 2.6% a year. That compounds to a 36% increase over that period. Had the 2013 rates for Amsterdam increased in line with inflation, workers who had spent more than 24 hours in the city would now receive more than €96. The fact that those rates have been ignored for so long means that cabin crew and pilots—including constituents of mine and those in adjacent areas—are losing out on subsistence payments of more than €25.

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

I represent Horsham, an adjacent constituency, and very much experience the same problems, so the issue is not rare. I have many cabin crew in my area who say the same thing. One of the people affected is trying to get leave to remain, but the visa application is made extremely complicated by going back and forth out of the country, so I very much support the hon. Member and emphasise to the Minister that it is not a small problem.

[Peter Lamb]

I take that fully on board. I am delighted that the hon. Member is here for this debate.

There are cities in Europe where the situation is even more pronounced than in Amsterdam. In Budapest, the total residual rate set in 2013 and unchanged since 2014 has been eaten away by a compound inflation rate of 67% in Hungary. The current payment of 16,000 forints is well over 10,000 forints, or 40%, lower than it should be. The worst example among European capitals, however, is in Ankara. In the years since the overseas subsistence rates were first set, Turkey has experienced huge inflation. Prices have risen at an average of 22.5% every year. Despite that, Ankara’s residual rate remains at 240 lira, as set in 2014. If it had increased with inflation, it would be over 2,500 lira today, which represents an unrealised tenfold increase.

In these situations, as a direct result of the Treasury not having revisited those rates over the last 12 years, airlines and other organisations are able to justify under-compensating their staff by pointing to what is essentially Government guidance. When I wrote to the Treasury with those concerns last year, the then Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, my right hon. Friend the Member for Ealing North (James Murray), informed me that in situations where expenses rates do not cover the actual costs of needing to eat, drink and sleep while abroad for work, the employers can instead choose to “pay actual expenses incurred”. Unfortunately, not every company chooses to do that for their employees, with many of them instead choosing—I do not think this will be a surprise to any of us—to pay the lower rate, the Government’s fixed rate.

The issue has a real and detrimental impact on the working lives of cabin crew. A constituent of mine working for an airline operating out of Gatwick airport was blunt about this, telling me that the fact that the rates are so far behind reality means that they have been forced to “miss meals” while abroad for work.

Another constituent stated that

“current scale rate allowances do not reflect the real costs we face on these trips”,

and reiterated that

“the allowance provided does not cover even the most basic meals.”

It is evident, therefore, that overseas scale rates must be raised. That is why I was delighted when, in his written statement, my hon. Friend the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury committed to reviewing and uprating them last month. This has been a long time coming. While simply increasing the 2013 rates in line with inflation would be welcome, I hope the Treasury takes the opportunity to undertake a full review of how subsistence rates can be systematically improved.

Having secured this debate, I was contacted by Virgin Atlantic, which, among other things, raised concerns that there are some destinations where the current rate might not reflect the full cost of subsistence for an individual visiting or living in the city. For instance, it provided the example of Lagos where safety restrictions require pilots and cabin crew to remain in their hotels and rely on higher cost room service or onsite dining. It is its view—one that I share—that any review should give consideration to those concerns and ensure that safe accommodation is made affordable under new rates.

I am well aware that questions related to tax pose difficult decisions for Governments, particularly in times of global economic uncertainty such as these. But I would hope that we would all accept that people should not go without meals while undertaking travel essential to their work, particularly where those individuals might already be on a very low wage. I will closely follow the outcome of the Treasury’s review of overseas scale rates, and I hope that the various issues I have highlighted today are reflected in its outcome.

Oral Answers to Questions

John Milne Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Rachel Reeves]

I will ensure that the relevant Minister meets my hon. Friend and others to discuss how we can make further enhancements to the Green Book. Something that has held Britain back for too long is that projects outside London and the south-east, including in rural and coastal communities, have missed out on funding because of the way in which the Treasury used to evaluate those projects. I have changed those rules so that we can make investments in all parts of the United Kingdom.

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

In my constituency, Chess Dynamics, part of Cohort, is a world-leading developer of counter-drone and air defence technology, yet like much of the defence sector, it has been left waiting for clarity on future investment. Given the recent turmoil at the top of the Labour party, can the Minister assure us that the vital defence investment plan will not be pushed back even further and finally give defence manufacturers the go-ahead—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. That is not relevant to the question.

Oral Answers to Questions

John Milne Excerpts

Tuesday 28th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Lucy Rigby]

The hon. Gentleman will not expect me to pre-empt anything that may or may not be announced in the King’s Speech. What I will tell him, though, as he already knows, is that this Government are backing our financial services sector to the hilt to ensure that it continues to be the world-leading success that it is.

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

4. What discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Defence on the effectiveness of the defence industrial strategy.

[The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (James Murray)]

The Chancellor and the Defence Secretary meet regularly to discuss defence, including the defence industrial strategy. As part of those discussions, they recently met leaders from the UK financial sector to discuss how private investment can also be leveraged to accelerate defence readiness, building on the commitments made in the defence industrial strategy.

[John Milne]

In my constituency of Horsham, Chess Dynamics, which is part of Cohort, is a world-leading developer of counter-drone and air defence technology—exactly the capabilities that we need. Yet Chess, like much of the defence industry, has been kept on hold since last year, awaiting clarity on the defence investment plan. Without it, it cannot commission new air defence systems, leaving the next generation of Royal Navy frigates potentially exposed. It needs to know now. Will the Minister agree to meet me and Chess Dynamics to provide certainty on the investment that everyone says we need, but which simply is not happening yet?

[James Murray]

Investment in defence under this Government is under way—just look at the contracts. Over a thousand have been signed since the general election: I point the hon. Gentleman, and anyone else in the Chamber, to the billion-pound contract for medium helicopters in Yeovil, the half-a-billion pounds invested in state-of-the-art radar systems and the £100 million boost to support submarine-hunting aircraft. This Government are raising investment in defence to the highest sustained level since the cold war and it is at the core of ensuring that we are protecting our nation’s security.

Rural Roads

John Milne Excerpts

Tuesday 17th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

In the last 20 years, traffic on locally managed major roads has fallen by around 5%, yet damage has never been worse. Why? Because rural routes are carrying traffic they were never designed for. Heavy goods vehicles are increasingly using villages such as Cowfold, Colgate and Lower Beeding in my constituency as rat runs. In the past five years, the A272 corridor, which has surprisingly been classified as a “primary route” despite slicing through a tiny, narrow village, has seen 79 casualties.

What should happen? First, the coming fair funding settlement will penalise rural councils for making the mistake of being rural, and we need to change that. Secondly, villages need greater freedom to set their own speed limits, reflecting the risks on narrow rural lanes for pedestrians, riders and drivers. Thirdly, the Government must intervene to ensure that commercial HGV satnavs follow the best routes, not simply the shortest ones.

Oral Answers to Questions

John Milne Excerpts

Tuesday 10th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Lucy Rigby]

I know how passionate my hon. Friend is about the Government’s priority to get more first-time buyers on to the housing ladder. As he and I have discussed before, people looking to buy a home can build their credit history through rent payments by using third-party services that report these things to credit reference agencies. I think that he and I would agree that better awareness of such services and the mortgages available that take account of tenants’ rental payments would be a good thing.

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

T7. Even while sitting here, I have had word from a constituent whose heating oil cost has risen, in one go, to 129.9p plus VAT per litre. I recognise that the Chancellor has been pressed by a number of Members on this. Can she assure us of immediate action, as vulnerable residents are in immediate crisis?

[Rachel Reeves]

While only 4% of people in Great Britain use heating oil, I recognise that this is a particular issue for many constituents, and in Northern Ireland the figure is more than 60%. I am keen for the hon. Gentleman to take these issues to the meeting with the Financial Secretary to the Treasury tomorrow. We are working closely with the Competition and Markets Authority to stop price gouging. There is no reason why a company should be charging twice as much as it was for heating oil; we need to put a stop to those practices.

Transport in the South-East

John Milne Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd February 2026 Westminster Hall

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Sir John. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller) for securing this debate. I can vouch for everything she said about the ring road around Chichester, which I have spent more hours on than I would rather. I agree that it has an impact on the commercial health of the city—it is off-putting to go anywhere in that direction. I was formerly a county councillor serving in Chichester, so I had to go there many times.

I also echo what my hon. Friend said about the pressure of new house building; in Horsham we also have many new estates. The section 106 funding goes towards roads within the estate or access roads, but it does not remedy deficiencies in the network as a whole—that is not what it was designed to do, and it does not do it. We have more and more housing going up along the same roads. In Horsham we have one dual carriageway running north to south, and that is pretty much it. The A29 is single-track and is severely overloaded already—and it will only get worse. I empathise with all the things my hon. Friend said. Horsham is also impacted by the Croydon bottleneck that she referred to. We suffer from delayed and cancelled trains as well, so I thank her for raising that issue.

I want to concentrate mainly on public transport, particularly buses. In my time on the council I was on the transport committee, so that is an area I campaigned on in the past. I know the severe pressures of budgets, so what I am suggesting to the Minister is looking at a number of budgets to do with public transport and possibly combining them.

The home-to-school transport budget in West Sussex has grown by over 100% in recent years, and the Government’s decision to un-ringfence funding and increase the distance cap from 20 to 50 miles is a welcome recognition that existing rules simply did not allow councils to meet their statutory duties. That particularly applies to special educational needs and disabilities pupils. In West Sussex, around £33 million is now allocated for home-to-school transport. The vast majority of that is on SEND provision and it is ballooning. At present, 63% of pupils are travelling via private taxi or minibus services rather than the West Sussex county council internal fleet. That fleet currently includes over 500 vehicles and represents a long-term investment by the council. It supports not just home-to-school transport but adult social care and transport for older residents.

I fully recognise that many SEND pupils do require individualised transport to meet their needs but, wherever possible, we should look at whether that could be delivered through internal fleets rather than outsourced contracts. Reliance on private providers brings higher costs, hidden inefficiencies and less resilience, while direct investment allows councils to build capacity and plan for the long term. In the meantime, however, we cannot ignore the pressure facing those private providers that are keeping SEND transport running. Providers in Horsham have raised serious concerns with me about the impact of national insurance contribution rises on their running costs. Some are questioning whether they can continue to offer these vital services at all.

Andy Mahoney, chair of the Licensed Private Hire Car Association’s SEND Transport Operators Group—that is some acronym—has been clear about the risk. The increase in employer national insurance will substantially raise costs for SEND transport operators, pushing already tight contracts into loss. If providers are forced to walk away, local authorities will be left struggling to meet their statutory obligations. The industry has calculated that a ringfenced emergency SEND transport grant of around £40m for 2025-26 would cover the shortfall across England, Wales and Northern Ireland. That is a modest sum when set against the disruption that would be caused if services collapse. The Government’s claim that the £515 million announced to offset NI rises for councils will address this issue simply does not hold, because that does nothing to address indirect costs passed on by private suppliers. That is why the Government should look at exempting smaller vehicles—those with fewer than 10 seats—from VAT when they are used for transport provision. Removing VAT would lower costs for providers, reduce pressure on council budgets and support more flexible, community-based provision. Cost saving is vital in the context of stretched local government finances.

The national Government already recognise remoteness as a factor in adult social care funding and they must do the same across other funding streams. County councils face an uphill battle otherwise, with County Councils Network estimates suggesting that 98p of every pound will be funded by residents rather than by central Government, compared to just 58p in metropolitan areas.

Rural bus services in Horsham have faced significant challenges in recent years. In particular I have raised concerns both locally and in Westminster on behalf of residents in Slinfold and Partridge Green many times. The No. 63 and No. 17 bus services, which serve those villages, have both faced damaging cuts. In Slinfold, residents like Lynne relied on the No. 63 bus to access Horsham town centre and the rail network. Good public transport links were a key reason for moving to the village in the first place. That service has been rerouted and no longer serves the village at all. In Partridge Green, residents have raised concerns for years about declining services and their ability to reach essential destinations. The removal of direct services to Horsham has cut people off from health services, the high street and basic utilities. Students no longer have a bus taking them to school or college, undermining access to education. Workers cannot commute between villages in Horsham, limiting employment opportunities. I chair the all-party parliamentary group for rural business and the rural powerhouse, and that is one of the things we are looking at. It is a major reason why rural areas have lower productivity rates than urban areas, and it could be reversed.

At the Horsham District older people’s forum last year, one gentleman told me that the only way he could reach appointments in Horsham from Partridge Green was to walk over a mile to the neighbouring village on his crutches. What is most shocking in Horsham is that recent service cuts were made without consultation. Villages were given little or no warning. Community campaigns were strong, passionate and well organised, but of course the decision had already been made before anybody knew it was even being discussed.

The bus operator, Stagecoach, told us that there is no formal requirement to consult residents and that, where changes are driven by commercial necessity, consultation does not normally take place. However, there is nothing to stop West Sussex county council from consulting, particularly where amendments would result in the complete loss of a service for the community. Other county councils do that. That is why I tabled an amendment to the recent Bus Services Act 2025 to make consultation compulsory, and I regret that it was rejected by the Government—not least because residents, given the opportunity, can come up with alternative solutions that would work better for everyone.

This is part of a wider national picture. Back in 2012, only 59% of rural households had a bus stop within a 13-minute walk that had an hourly service. Since then, councils have been forced to make deep cuts, in some cases losing up to 43% of funding. Nationally, bus service provision has fallen by 28%. With economic inactivity almost 2.5% higher in rural areas, ensuring access to education and employment through public transport must be a priority. The Liberal Democrats are clear about what needs to happen. We want simpler funding streams for councils, a return to the £2 bus fare cap and the removal of VAT on smaller public transport vehicles. We need to look at co-ordinating all local transport needs and budgets, including schools, SEND, buses and community transport services. Yes, money is tight, but we can make the same money work harder.

Local councils face huge challenges. We must reduce reliance on private transport providers over time through sustained investment in internal fleets, but in the short term, we also need to work with private providers, offering tax relief where possible, and supporting them so they can continue to operate. We have to reverse the slow death of rural transport services.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

Horse and Rider Road Safety

John Milne Excerpts

Wednesday 14th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. Horse riders are not a marginal group on our roads and we should stop treating them like one. They are a vital part of rural life.

I want to thank Sophie from Billingshurst, a village in my constituency, who wrote to me ahead of the debate. She argues that we are facing a cultural problem. There is a fundamental lack of understanding about how to drive in close proximity to horses, whether they are being ridden or transported. She described being tailgated for miles while towing a horsebox. Eventually, the driver overtook and cut sharply in front of her, forcing an urgent and potentially dangerous stop. Anyone who understands the weight and stopping distance of a vehicle carrying live animals will recognise how serious that could have been. Thankfully, neither horse nor rider was hurt.

Riders are being pushed into using roads more extensively, often because there is no alternative. In Shipley, a bridleway bridge has been closed for more than two years with no clear repair timetable, forcing riders on to busy roads, simply to access legal routes. Horse riders seem to count as low priority when it comes to highways funding.

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

Just last month I presented a petition in this place about a greenway in my constituency between Radcliffe and Cotgrave, which has been closed for two years. That means that people such as Jacqui, who rides a horse, cannot use it. Does the hon. Member agree that we need to encourage the expansion of and investment in this type of infrastructure?

--- Later in debate ---

[John Milne]

I thank the hon. Member for the intervention.

We must also place this debate in the wider context of changing rural road use. In Cowfold parish, the accident rate has doubled in the past five years, with three fatalities and 20 serious injuries. Traffic volumes have increased but road infrastructure has not kept pace. Although stronger regulation on speed and passing distances is welcome and necessary, it is not sufficient on its own.

We need better driver education, clearer national messaging and a cultural shift in how horses are understood by other road users. We need to rethink rural road policy more broadly. Can we take action to stop HGV routeing systems sending unsuitable vehicles through villages and bridleway links? Can we look at weight limits and improved road services, and make it easier for communities to introduce lower speed limits, as has been done successfully in parts of Somerset, for example?

In conclusion, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury. I very much support the measures he suggests and I hope the Minister will listen.

Finance (No. 2) Bill

John Milne Excerpts

Committee of the whole House
Tuesday 13th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Daisy Cooper]

I agree 100% with my hon. Friend. One of the points that I have made repeatedly to other Ministers is that businesses heard the promise that there would be permanently lower business rates, and made decisions based on the fact that they had heard the word “lower”. The Government gave themselves powers to introduce a lower multiplier for retail, hospitality and leisure—20p less—and it was understood by the hospitality industry that if they used those powers, that would effectively cancel out the loss of the RHL relief. Businesses made investment decisions. They made hiring decisions. They made all sorts of decisions based on what they thought was going to happen. But the Government have not used those powers that they gave themselves, using a multiplier of minus 5p rather than the maximum of minus 20p.

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

I recently met Richard, a publican in my constituency, and he told me the trade had never been so tough. He said:

“The truth of the matter is, for the first time I’m thinking I shouldn't have bothered taking the risk of going into business. I should have stayed with the big brewer, taken my salary and relied on my pension.”

He is right, isn’t he?

[Daisy Cooper]

I hope so very much that he is not, but I understand why he said that, and I hear the same from many hospitality owners and pub landlords on my own patch.

It is because we Liberal Democrats care so deeply for hospitality, and recognise the vital role that it plays in every community in the land, that we were campaigning ahead of the Budget for an emergency VAT cut for hospitality accommodation and attractions until April 2027 —a measure that would have brought growth into every corner of our country, saved jobs and our high streets, and given a real boost to consumer confidence. That is why, since the Budget, we have been fighting tirelessly against the Government’s devastating business rates hikes, and pressing Ministers to implement the full 20p discount for which they legislated last year.

Finance (No. 2) Bill

John Milne Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 16th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Daisy Cooper (St Albans) (LD)]

If this Finance Bill represents anything, I am sorry to say that it represents the fact that the Government know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. We Liberal Democrats have tabled a reasoned amendment against this Bill, setting out all the reasons why we are against it.

Ultimately, this Bill is a series of short-term Treasury tax grabs, with no care for the consequences and no vision for the future. People are crying out for change—the change that they were promised—but the double whammy of stealth taxes on households and high streets makes the Labour Government look like nothing more than continuity Conservatives. Once again extending the unfair freeze on income tax thresholds will drag millions of low-paid workers into tax. The failure to reform the business rates system again makes the Government look like continuity Conservatives.

In a turbulent world, we need to boost our sovereign capabilities, and food security is critical to that, yet despite all the evidence, all the campaigning and all the honking of tractor horns on Whitehall, the Government have failed to get it right.

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

In 2023, the Prime Minister told the National Farmers Union that

“losing a farm is not like losing any other business”.

He has also said,

“If somebody makes powerful representations, then my instinct is to consider what’s being said. Getting it right is more important than ploughing on with a package which doesn’t necessarily achieve the desired outcome.”

Is it not time that the Prime Minister followed his instincts and abandoned the family farm tax?

[Daisy Cooper]

I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention, and I wholeheartedly agree that the Prime Minister should change direction. It is deeply disappointing that, having been grilled at the Liaison Committee yesterday, he clearly has no intention of doing so. The changes to the agricultural property relief and the business property relief will punish family farmers who put food on our tables and guarantee the food security of our nation, and they will not tackle the loophole of private equity companies and celebrity farmers buying land to reduce their tax liability.

Oral Answers to Questions

John Milne Excerpts

Tuesday 9th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

11. What fiscal steps she is taking to help increase growth in rural areas.

[The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (James Murray)]

Growth is the No. 1 mission of this Government, and we are committed to unlocking growth in every corner of this country. We have committed £2.7 billion per year to supporting sustainable farming, £2.3 billion of transport funding for places beyond city regions through the local transport grant, and more than £1.9 billion for gigabit broadband and 4G connectivity. That funding will help to tackle key blockers to growth in rural areas, unlocking the opportunities and benefits of growth for people right across the UK.

[John Milne]

Later today I will chair a meeting of the all-party parliamentary group for rural business and the rural powerhouse, which focuses on generating rural growth. If we could push rural productivity closer to western European averages, it would fix the Government’s budgetary black hole all by itself. Will the Minister agree to set a measurable target for increasing rural productivity so that we can hold the Government to account on progress?

[James Murray]

I welcome the hon. Gentleman drawing attention to the importance of productivity in the UK economy and our prospects for growth. As we know, the Office for Budget Responsibility reviewed the productivity impact of the previous Government’s record in office and found that the decisions they had taken over those 14 years meant that we had a £16 billion revenue hit to the public finances in the target year of the scorecard. We know that means that productivity has been downgraded as a result of decisions taken by the previous Government, but that gives us an opportunity—an opportunity to not be held back by the failures of the previous Government and to exceed those forecasts in future.