MPs support Truss and Kwarteng £6,000 of their ministerial payouts over disastrous mini-budget

MPs today passed a motion calling on former Prime Minister Liz Truss and former Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng to forfeit at least £6,000 of their severance pay.

The House of Commons backed a Labor call for the pair to lose the money over their “mismanagement of the economy during their time in office.”

Ms Truss’s spell as Prime Minister fell apart spectacularly after just 44 days in the wake of her and Mr Kwarteng’s disastrous mini-budget in September.

Their ambition for £45bn in unfunded tax cuts shocked financial markets and exacerbated Britain’s economic turmoil.

In a motion from the House of Commons, Labor leader Sir Keir Starmer today urged MPs to ‘censor’ Ms Truss and Mr Kwarteng for their actions.

He claimed the couple’s policies – which were quickly thrown out – had ‘resulted in an average £500 a month increase in mortgage payments for families in the UK’.

The Labor motion required Ms Truss and Mr Kwarteng, if they have not already done so, to ‘remit at least £6,000 of their ministerial severance payments’.

When she stepped down as prime minister last month, Mrs Truss was entitled to a quarter of her annual salary as severance pay.

This made her eligible for a payout of £18,860 from her historically short stint in number 10.

Ms Truss’s spell as prime minister spectacularly fell apart after just 44 days in the wake of her and Mr Kwarteng’s disastrous mini-budget in September

Tory backbencher apologizes after telling Labor MPs to shut up in the House of Commons

Labour’s frontbench – including Paula Barker, Sarah Owen and Lisa Nandy – reacted with shock

A Conservative MP was forced to apologize today after suggesting that a group of Labor MPs should keep their mouths shut.

Sedgefield MP Paul Howell’s comment in the House of Commons came as he spoke out against Labour’s proposal that Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng not withhold part of the severance pay from their time as prime minister and chancellor.

In response to Labor MPs asking questions as he continued to speak, Mr Howell said: ‘You’ve been chirping and talking – do you want to hear or do you want to shut up?’

He immediately apologized when those in the front bench of Labor – including Sarah Owen, Lisa Nandy and Paula Barker – gasped audibly.

Deputy Speaker Nigel Evans accepted Mr Howell’s apology and reminded MPs: ‘This is not small talk. This is a debate.’

Mr Kwarteng, who had previously been sacked by Mrs Truss in her failed attempt to stay on as Prime Minister, was entitled to a payout of £16,876 when he left as Chancellor.

The motion calling on Mrs Truss and Mr Kwarteng to waive some of those payments passed the House of Commons without a formal vote this afternoon.

This was because Tory MPs chose not to contest the motion in a division.

Opposition day motions, as tabled by Labor this afternoon, are non-binding.

And while previous governments always tried to vote them out, recent Tory governments have preferred MPs to abstain and ignore them.

In today’s debate on the motion calling for the censure of Ms Truss and Mr Kwarteng, Labor shadow communities secretary Lisa Nandy told MPs that the severance payments owed to the former prime minister and ex-chancellor were ‘obscene ‘ goods.

“That’s more than many of my constituents earn in a full year and they’d have a brass neck to pocket so much for a job so horrifically executed,” Ms Nandy told the Commons.

But housing minister Lucy Frazer told MPs the government did not consider it “appropriate” to make arbitrary demands of individuals regarding their rights, as it is a “completely discretionary” matter for those involved.

She pointed out that both Ms Truss and Mr Kwarteng had been ministers for quite some time ‘before becoming prime minister and chancellor… and therefore have a legal right’.

“That is not to say that ministers cannot waive such payments,” Ms Frazer added.

‘That is not a matter for the government, it is entirely a matter of discretion for those involved.

“And the government doesn’t think it’s appropriate to make arbitrary demands on individuals regarding their rights.”