Q&A: MPs' expenses
The Daily Telegraph has published expenses claims made by cabinet
ministers under the controversial second homes allowance. It is the
latest development in a long-running row over the much-criticised
system.
WHAT DOES THE TELEGRAPH SAY?
The newspaper has published what is says are claims made by cabinet
ministers under the most controversial type of MPs' expense - the second
homes allowance. It says it will be publishing claims by the other
parties in the days ahead. Among those flagged up are Gordon Brown's
£6,577 cleaning bill over 26 months which were paid to his brother -
Downing Street says they shared a cleaner and it was to reimburse him
for costs. As well as publishing the details of the ministers' claims,
the newspaper says it has uncovered evidence of how some MPs "work the
system" and maximise their claims. The newspaper has not confirmed
whether it paid for the information.
WHAT DOES THE GOVERNMENT SAY?
None of the claims made by the newspaper has yet been directly denied by
the MPs involved - but there have been suggestions their publication was
politically motivated. The Telegraph ran the story on ministers' claims
prominently across its first nine pages. Lord Mandelson said: "Let's
wait and see whether the Conservatives, who this paper supports, gives
them quite the same prominence, quite the same space that today's paper
has given to members of the Labour party's cabinet." Senior Labour MP
Sir Stuart Bell has also criticised the newspaper for "chequebook
journalism".
WHERE DID THE INFORMATION COME FROM?
Commons officials have been putting all MPs' claims, backed by millions
of receipts, together to be published in full in July. They were forced
to act after losing a long Freedom of Information battle with
campaigners and being ordered to publish by the High Court. The
Telegraph has not commented on how it got hold of the information early.
It says it acted in the public interest and many of the details would
not have come to light in July - for example claims that MPs switched
their "second home" designation to be able to claim for two properties -
as addresses would have been blanked out before publication.
ARE THE POLICE INVESTIGATING THE LEAK?
Not yet. But the Commons authorities, which had been compiling the
expenses details for them to be processed by an outside contractor, has
asked the police to investigate. Police say they are "considering" that
request. The Commons says there are "reasonable grounds to believe a
criminal offence may have been committed". The BBC understands that
could include theft, a breach of the Official Secrets Act or data
protection rules.
AREN'T MPs REFORMING THEIR EXPENSES?
Attempts to reform MPs' expenses have been going on for over a year.
Following recent headlines about ministers' claims the issue was
referred to an independent body - the Committee on Standards in Public
Life - which was expected to come forward with proposals by the end of
the year. In April Gordon Brown came up with his own plan, saying
interim changes must be made more quickly - but last week he had to drop
a key proposal for a daily attendance allowance, amid widespread
opposition from opposition parties and some Labour MPs. However some
changes were voted through last week - including stopping MPs
representing greater London constituencies claiming for a second home,
requiring receipts for all claims - rather than just those over £25 -
and more details of second jobs.
WHAT WAS WRONG WITH A DAILY ALLOWANCE?
Both the Tory and Lib Dem leaders made clear they would not support
Gordon Brown's plan, arguing it would be worse than the old system. This
required receipts while an attendance allowance, they say, would amount
to a "cheque for turning up to work". Many Labour MPs are believed to
have been opposed to it and there was some anger at the way it had been
announced - on the Downing Street You Tube site - without first
consulting Labour or the other parties. Sir Christopher Kelly, who is
heading up an independent inquiry into the expenses system, also said a
daily allowance was unlikely to win public support. Some MPs say no
decisions should be taken until Sir Christopher reports back.
WHY DO MPs NEED A SECOND HOME?
MPs have to spend part of their week working in their constituency and
part of it in Westminster. The second homes allowance is designed to
allow them to do that. MPs are asked to designated either their
constituency or London property as their "second home", for which they
can claim reimbursements for costs incurred "wholly, exclusively and
necessarily incurred from the purpose of performing your Parliamentary
duties". Many MPs take exception to suggestions they are padding out
their salaries with the allowance. The Telegraph highlights Energy
Secretary Ed Miliband, Health Secretary Alan Johnson and Environment
Secretary Hilary Benn for their "modest" claims.
WHY IS IT SO CONTROVERSIAL?
The "additional costs allowance", worth up to £24,006 in 2008/9 for MPs
representing seats outside central London, has been targeted by Freedom
of Information campaigners who believe it is the expense most open to
abuse. Before reforms began last year, MPs could use it to claim any
item under £250 without providing receipts - that has been reduced to
£25. It covers things like mortgage interest payments on second homes
and utility bills - but Commons officials also allow claims for items of
furniture, electrical goods like televisions, refurbishments and food.
Those claims have proved some of the most controversial with MPs
claiming for items as small as bath plugs.
WHICH CLAIMS HAVE PREVIOUSLY MADE THE HEADLINES?
Among controversial claims are Jacqui Smith's decision to designate her
family home in Worcestershire, as her "second" home - for which she
claimed at least £116,000 in expenses - while claiming her main home was
her sister's house in London where she stays during the week. She has
also apologised for "mistakenly" claiming £10 for two adult films
watched by her husband. Work minister Tony McNulty is also being
investigating for claiming up to £14,000 a year for his constituency
home where his parents live in Harrow East. He moved out in 2002 to the
property he designates his main home - eight miles away in Hammersmith.
He says he used the constituency home as a base when working in Harrow.
Both say they acted within the rules.
IS IT JUST LABOUR MPs UNDER SCRUTINY?
No. While ministers' claims have dominated recent headlines, the issue
first hit the headlines when Tory MP Derek Conway was reprimanded by the
Commons standards and privileges committee for overpaying his two sons
who he employed as researchers. He was expelled from the party and
ordered to repay £13, 161 paid to his younger son Freddie - who was a
student in Newcastle during the period he was employed - and £3,757 paid
to his son Henry. The case increased scrutiny of the practice of MPs
employing their own relatives - they now have to be declared. Tory
frontbencher Caroline Spelman was also told to repay £9,600 she paid to
a part-time constituency secretary who, it was claimed, had worked
mainly as her nanny. But the standards committee said any breach of the
rules was "unintentional"
over the next few days of MPs from all parties, including the
Conservatives and Lib Dems.
DO MPs REALISE HOW BAD IT LOOKS?
MPs from all parties are acutely aware of the damage constant media
stories about their expenses are doing to their standing with the
public. That is why they say they are keen to reform the system - but
although some changes have been voted through they have yet to reach a
cross-party agreement on second homes.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.
Published: 2009/05/08 16:18:05 GMT
Posts
