I don't earn any salary now but even when I was employed by the Church of England I was only earning about £22000 per year as I worked in one of the poorer paying dioceses.
So this story MAKES ME FECKING ANGRY!!!!
From THE INDEPENDENT:
Bishops are claiming up to £27,000 a year in fixed-rate allowances to attend sessions of the House of Lords on top of their travel costs. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism and The Independent has found that some bishops are claiming up to the maximum fixed allowance for attending sessions in the second chamber while having full-time jobs in their dioceses.
From October 2010 to November 2011:
* The Bishop of Chester attended the House on 97 days, claiming £27,600 in attendance allowances and £7,309 in travel expenses.
* The Bishop of Liverpool attended on 60 days, claiming £15,600 for attendance and £4,220 in expenses.
* Other significant claimers included the Bishop of Exeter (£11,550), the Bishop of Leicester (£8,850) and the Bishop of Wakefield (£10,650).
In contrast, a number of bishops regularly attended the House but did not claim any attendance allowances at all. The Bishop of Birmingham attended the House of Lords on 22 occasions but claimed no money. The Archbishop of York attended on 16 occasions and claimed nothing. The Archbishop of Canterbury also made no charge. However, the Bishop of London claimed £3,750 for attending the Lords on 24 occasions.
So, the "oh so righteous" fundie Bishop of Chester's expenses claim is £5000 more than I ever earned per year in my life. He is claiming £21000 more than I now have each year to survive on.
It would also appear that, on the whole, evangelical bishops ask for more expenses than liberal bishops.