| Author | Message | | gchq | | Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 6:20 pm Post subject: (Employment??) Minister defends expenses... |
| From Channel 4 News
EMPLOYMENT MINISTER DEFENDS EXPENSES
It's emerged that a government minister, Tony McNulty, claimed £60,000 in second-home expenses, on his parents' house in his constituency, just eight miles from his own home.
The employment minister says he stopped claiming the money in January and he hasn't broken any parliamentary rules and that having a place to stay nearer Westminster means he can do his job better.
It's all very similar to the Jacqui Smith saga and we're not doing much on this tonight beyond marking it.
But it might rumble in the coming days, mostly because it underlines how silly the expenses rules are, and how politicians have got themselves into doing things they are entitled to, but which may seem inappropriate. | |  | | gchq | | Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:19 pm Post subject: Are rules on MPs’ expenses too lax? |
| From Channel 4 News
The revelations about Tony McNulty’s Commons expenses seem to have tipped the issue over the top. The minister for works and pensions has claimed £60,000 since 2002 under MPs’ second homes allowances - the house in question is in his Harrow constituency, about 11 miles or so from Westminster. He doesn't live in the house - his parents do.
Mr McNulty says he hasn't broken any rules - that's been disputed today, and a formal complaint has been made by a Tory MP. Aside from Mr McNulty's conduct, much of the outrage flying around today has been targeted at the rules themselves - are they just too lax?
My contacts in the House of Lords have given me several named individuals who do something very similar.
Mr McNulty is showing an intriguing lack of interest in granting interviews today. This is a minister who is almost the least backward in coming forward in normal circumstances.
However, we are on the case, and on the case of others, at seven here on 4.
McNulty could face expenses probe: http://tinyurl.com/cpgu4f | | | | gchq | | Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:13 pm Post subject: Home Secretary's husband apologises |
| From Channel 4 News
HOME SECRETARY’S HUSBAND APOLOGISES
First off to the front gates of Jacqui Smith’s gaff where the Home Secretary’s husband has been forced to come out and apologise to the assembled hackery. The story goes that he’s hired a couple of porno films whilst she was not at home. No crime there. Nor any interest frankly. The trouble is, that expenses claims were somehow made for this and all that from a Home Secretary already under scrutiny for dubious exes right down to 88p for a bath plug.
To say nothing of that £550 for the kitchen sink. Some sink.
The Home Secretary has said sorry like her beleaguered husband. Voters, one can only assume, will just be further disillusioned by all this and by a system that pays MPs of all parties lavishly for all manner of stuff which has little or nothing to do with their jobs. All parties are in the soup over this -- you can rest assured. Only when claims are fully published later this year will the real picture come out. We might then know just how much irrelevant home entertainment we are busily funding as taxpayers – along with plugs, sinks and all manner of stuff.
Because of these two facts expect no real witchhunt to evict the Home Secretary from office. Stones…glass houses…and all that.
You can watch Richard Timney’s apology here: http://tinyurl.com/c57vpu | | | | gchq | | Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:59 pm Post subject: Expenses scandal |
| From Channel 4 news
Stung by the continuing scandal of MPs’ expenses highlighted by the porn videos paid for by the public purse in the home secretary’s entry, the speaker of the House of Commons has released ALL MPs’ expenses for the last two years.
We now know that the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith claimed £22,948 in 2007/8, which even my abysmal maths tells me is just £135 short of the maximum £23,083 that MPs are allowed to claim in second home allowances per year.
We and others, I'm sure, are now trawling through the detail to see what others titbits await, though the kind of detail we've already seen for the home secretary is not yet available for all her parliamentary colleagues.
There's much talk tonight of who leaked the details of Ms Smith's expenses, prompting her to pay them back. But the PM is sticking by her, despite the attention this has drawn to her decision to claim a second home allowance on the place where her husband and family spend much of their time whilst she lodges with her sister in London in their “main home”.
As if that wasn't enough, Ms Smith and other ministers will have their pay frozen this year. Opposition parties have followed suit.
What’s in Jacqui Smith’s expenses?: http://tinyurl.com/df4s3v | | | | gchq | | Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:33 pm Post subject: Row rages on |
| MPS EXPENSES ROW RAGES ON
After all that, the MPs' expenses story looks rather frivolous in comparison. Except that this is clearly an issue that is exercising the public, many of whom can't fathom how some of their representatives appear to have been taking part in a surreal reality property show at the taxpayer's expense.
The latest cabinet minister to have his accommodation and expenses exposed to public scrutiny is the chancellor, Alistair Darling. Neither he, nor the transport secretary, Geoff Hoon, nor Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, wishes to be interviewed about this, though all insist they acted within the rules.
If you missed the Labour MP Paul Flynn on our programme last night, trying to explain the system to the voters in his Newport constituency, here's a chance to catch-up.
All aboard the expenses gravy train: http://tinyurl.com/c4zn5j
From Channel 4 | | | | gchq | | Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 5:03 pm Post subject: No expense claim spared |
| From Channel 4 News
The government is still digging. It seems the expenses scandal in the Commons will neither retreat nor clarify. The revelations in the Telegraph have embarrassed Labour today and doubtless the Tories tomorrow, but in the end the only party that has unfailingly sought to suppress the information and prevent it from coming out has been the governing party.
Tonight, the gory detail, the efforts to keep it secret and we have a significant interview with the leader of the house - Harriet Harman.
Watch the full Harriet Harman interview now: http://tinyurl.com/pddfbj | | | | gchq | | Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 8:44 pm Post subject: Sinn Fein claimed £500,000 for second homes |
| MPs' expenses: Sinn Fein claimed £500,000 for second homes
Telegraph
09 May 2009
The scandal of how absent Sinn Fein MPs have milked the Parliamentary second-home expenses system for nearly £500,000 can be revealed.
The five MPs, who represent the political wing of the IRA, have not even taken up their Parliamentary seats and yet they have rented three London properties from the same family at rates well above the market norm.
The party's two best-known figures, Gerry Adams, the party leader, and Martin McGuinness, Northern Ireland's deputy first minister, jointly claimed expenses of £3,600 a month to rent a shared two-bedroom flat in north London. A local estate agent, who knows the properties, said a fair monthly rent for the flat would be £1,400.
The three other Sinn Fein MPs together claimed £5,400 a month to rent a shared, modern town house, which the estate agent said would rent on the open market for around £1,800 a month. At other times some of the MPs have stayed in a third property, another two-bedroom flat.
The Telegraph has made a series of explosive revelations about MPs' expenses that have rocked Westminster, including more disclosures today about senior Labour and Conservative politicians. More details will be published over the coming days.
The five Sinn Fein MPs have claimed more than £310,000 in five years from the public purse by submitting receipts from one man, an Irish landlord living in London, and his family.
Immediate neighbours of the three north London properties, which are all part of the same development, could not recall seeing any of the five MPs when shown photographs of them.
The five MPs denied acting improperly last night. They insisted the money had been "legitimately claimed" and that they did "regularly" travel to London for work, when they used their rented properties. The MPs say their rent includes parking, housekeeping and utility bills.
However, there were calls last night for an investigation into our disclosures. Owen Paterson, the shadow Northern Ireland secretary, said: "This needs to be looked at by the House [of Commons'] authorities. Any possible breach of rules should be investigated by either the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner or the Fees' Office [responsible for finance and administration]. All MPs have to operate within the rules, or the spirit of the rules."
Mr Paterson said the rules need to be changed, and would be reformed under a Tory Government. "It is absolutely inconceivable that a Tory-dominated House of Commons is going to vote for allowances for MPs who don't turn up."
This paper's investigation revealed that some of Sinn Fein's MPs have rotated between the three properties, in some cases moving from one property to another then back to the first for no obvious reason. The MPs have submitted rudimentary rent receipts to the Commons authorities to support their expenses claims.
Neighbours of the three-storey town house where three MPs - Michelle Gildernew, Pat Doherty and Conor Murphy - claimed expenses last year, could not recognise the politicians in photographs shown to them by The Sunday Telegraph.
One resident, who did not want to be named, said that the yellow-brick house was a rental property where young professionals appeared to "come and go".
One resident, who helps run the development, said of the MPs: "They do not live here. I have never seen them, although I do recognise from the photos that they are something to do with Sinn Fein."
The Sinn Fein MPs also have identical televisions and stereo systems. Receipts submitted to the Commons authorities show that in 2004, two of the flats, each rented at the time by two of the MPs, were equipped with "Samson" 28-inch widescreen televisions, each costing £329, and DVD Sony cinema surround systems, each costing £230. The invoices were made out in the same handwriting, with one of the flats also charging for a three-seat settee, costing £795, and Venetian blinds, costing £485.
The three properties have been rented from three members of one family, which this newspaper is not naming. The landlord and his family own at least 12 properties in the area. He and his wife live in a town house close to the rented properties.
When contacted yesterday, the landlord's wife confirmed that the family owned all three properties. She said that the Sinn Fein MPs were currently renting two of the three properties, but they had also been renting the third. "They alternate [between the properties]," she said. She refused to answer any detailed questions about the rental arrangements between the family and the Sinn Fein MPs. "My husband's business affairs are his affairs," she said.
Since MPs' second-home expenses figures were first published in 2004 for the period covering 2001/2, the five MPs have claimed £437,405 under the Additional Costs Allowance (ACA) system, which helps MPs to meet the cost of running a second home, and which was last year worth up to £24,000 per MP.
The five each claimed £21,000 of ACA in the last financial year, just short of the maximum permitted.
Earlier this year, it emerged that Sinn Fein's MPs claimed a total of £662,660 of taxpayer-funded allowances in 2007/8, including travel costs, offices and staff salaries.
The Sinn Fein MPs have never taken up their seats at Westminster because it would involve swearing an oath of allegiance to the Queen. However, in 2001, as part of the Northern Irish Peace Process, they were given permission by the Government to start claiming Parliamentary expenses, prompting cries of "treason" and "shame" in the Commons when the decision was announced.
A Sinn Fein spokesman in Belfast responded to questions from The Sunday Telegraph on behalf of all five of the party's MPs. He said: "It is widely known that Sinn Fein MPs travel regularly to London on Parliamentary business and utilise the accommodation that we rent when there. We do not purchase properties at public expense and therefore do not profit from the expenses claimed as of right. The rent we pay on these properties are all inclusive of parking, utilities, housekeeping etc and therefore you are not comparing like with like."
Each MP said that he, or she, only ever claimed for one property each year: "I feel no duty to repay anything that I have legitimately claimed and to which I am entitled under the same rules as all other MPs. If the rules are changed then I will abide by the new rules."
"Sinn Fein is unique in that we are the only political party that voluntarily publishes our financial accounts annually in the interest of openness and transparency. If only other parties would do likewise then the public might have more confidence in their public representatives." | | | | gchq | | Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 5:33 pm Post subject: |
| From Channel 4 News
I'll be interviewing Sir Stuart Bell tonight, Labour's senior backbencher on the House of Commons Commission, about their decision to bring in outside auditors to check MP expenses. Without a change in the system why should it make any difference? Is it an admission that MPs have been up to no good? Or more blaming of the system? There are various new threads to the expenses scandal today.
Hazel Blears appears to have avoided paying capital gains tax on the sale of the flat she designated her 'second home' to the Commons fees office. Tony Blair's office has shrugged off revelations about the re-mortgage of his constituency home to pay a deposit on his new Connaught Square townhouse before he left the Commons. His spokesman pointed out that the former PM had only claimed the interest payments on the portion of the new mortgage that covered the purchase and improvement of the constituency house, and not the extra equity release.
But many voters will wonder why they are helping MP's get rich by playing the property market at all. Margaret Moran came up with a very interesting argument as to why she should be allowed to designate a home a hundred miles from her constituency as her 'second home'. It is where her partner lives, she says, and all MP's need the support of such a partner. All of this continues to infuriate those who read, listen or watch anything about it. There will be more drip feeding until the full expenses are published in July and it will no doubt poison politics right up to the next election and beyond. This whole political generation has been tainted by it whether or not their individual claims were fair or not, and they may never quite recover. Of course every MP will have to face the voters and explain their expenses claims before too long.
Further expenses embarrassment: http://tinyurl.com/q3png3
Snowblog: MP expenses :http://tinyurl.com/pttahz | | | | gchq | | Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 8:17 pm Post subject: MPs expenses: Questions and Answers |
| MPs expenses: Questions and Answers
The Telegraph
Gordon Raynor
10 May 2009
What is the second homes allowance for?
It enables MPs to claim back the cost of running a second home, either in their constituency or in London, by recouping the cost of rent, mortgage interest repayments, utility bills, furniture and household running costs, up to a maximum which currently stands at £24,222.
How do they define which home is their "second" one?
The Green Book states that the second home should be the one where the MP spends the least number of nights in any given year. But officials rarely, if ever, check whether this is the case, meaning many MPs claim their main family home as their "second" home. So the taxpayer foots their biggest household bills while the MP lives cheaply in a small flat or rented room which they say is their "main" home. This is the ruse that got Jacqui Smith into trouble earlier this year.
How often can they change the address of their "second" home?
There is nothing to stop MPs changing their nominated second home as often as they like. Many of them "flip" their addresses between their London home and their constituency home so they can renovate one house at the taxpayers' expense, change the address and then make improvements to their other house. Others renovate their home, sell it for a large profit, then do the same at their next address to climb the property ladder.
Are they allowed to keep all the profits when they sell their "second" home?
Yes. And many also avoid paying capital gains tax, by telling the tax authorities that their "second" home is in fact their main residence.
Do they have to submit receipts for every penny they claim back?
No. Until recent changes in the rules, no claim under £250 had to be accompanied by a receipt. So many MPs put in claims for £249 for cleaners, handymen, etc.
Do MPs have to stop claiming once they have announced their decision to retire?
No. They can carry on claiming until the day they step down, and several MPs splashed out thousands on renovations even after they had said they were retiring, in order to maximise their profits when the second home was sold.
Can they claim back their council tax?
Yes, but this is another area which is open to abuse. Scores of MPs submitted claims for the full rate of council tax on their "second" home, paid by the taxpayer, meaning they can claim a discounted rate on their main home by telling their local council this is their "second" home.
Can they claim for food?
Yes, if they are meals which they have eaten while staying away from their main home. They do not need to submit receipts (though some do) and can claim a maximum of £400 per month. Some MPs even wait until the end of the financial year and then submit one food claim for £4,800.
How do they prove that portable items, such as furniture, are being used at the second home?
They don't. There is widespread evidence of MPs claiming for furniture for their main home as well as their second home, with some having large items, such as beds and wardrobes, delivered to the "wrong" address.
Are the rules being broken?
The vast majority of MPs are not breaking the letter of the rules – although some are.
However, MPs use a variety of questionable techniques to "milk" the system – including "flipping" the designation of which of two properties is their "second home", buying goods for the "wrong" home, charging for stamp duty, avoiding capital gains tax, renting out a second home, moving up the property ladder by selling second homes, charging for trivial items, overspending on food or renovations, and doing up properties just before standing down from parliament.
Why is this scandal happening now?
A year ago the High Court backed an earlier ruling by the Information Tribunal that full details of MPs' expenses, including receipts, should be made public.
Since then MPs have been accused of dragging their feet and playing for time. Full details are slated to be published in July but with some crucial details – such as addresses of second homes – blacked out. An investigation by the Telegraph has uncovered the full files.
What happens next?
MPs face pressure to release the full details earlier than planned – a move called for by Alastair Campbell, the former director of communications at Downing Street, and Charles Clarke, the former home secretary.
The revelations have unleashed a tidal wave of public anger against MPs who play the system. Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, will face further calls to liaise with other party leaders and introduce urgent changes to the system, particularly regarding the ACA. | | | | gchq | | Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 12:50 am Post subject: Tories deny ‘flipping’ homes |
| Tories deny ‘flipping’ homes as David Cameron says it’s a bad day for party
The Times
11 May 2009
David Cameron apologised last night in advance of a slew of embarrassing disclosures about senior members of his own team.
The fallout from MPs’ expenses hit the Conservatives as it emerged that members of the Shadow Cabinet claimed for dog food, chauffeurs and nights at the Garrick Club.
Andrew Lansley, the Shadow Health Secretary, and Michael Gove, the Shadow Schools Secretary, were accused of changing the properties designated as their second homes to maximise their allowances, a practice known as “flipping”. Both strongly denied this last night.
In what is likely to be a relief for the party, however, Mr Cameron and George Osborne, the Shadow Chancellor, were shown to have largely unremarkable expense claims, predominantly composed of mortgage interest, according to The Daily Telegraph. Mr Osborne claimed for one journey in a chauffeur-driven car.
Mr Cameron publicly apologised, in an attempt to take some of the sting out of the allegations. “Tomorrow is going to be another bad day for Parliament and another bad day for the Conservative Party. We have to acknowledge how bad this is. This system that we had and that we used — it was wrong and we are sorry about that.”
Mr Lansley was reported last night to have spent thousands of pounds renovating a thatched Tudor country cottage shortly before selling it. He redecorated inside and out with premium paint at a cost of £2,000 and re-shingled the driveway.
The Telegraph said he then “flipped” his expenses to a Georgian flat in London where he claimed for thousands of pounds in furnishings, including a Laura Ashley sofa. Mr Lansley rejected this. He said he changed the location of his main home in 2005 because his daughter started going to nursery school in Cambridgeshire.
Mr Gove was reported to have spent more than £7,000 in five months furnishing a London property in 2006 before changing his second home designation to a new property that he bought in Surrey. He then claimed more than £13,000 in stamp duty and other fees from his parliamentary expenses for this property. He denies “flipping” and says he never profited from the system. He also claimed for nights at the Garrick when he had nowhere else to stay in London.
Francis Maude, who is in charge of the “implementation unit”, which readies party policy for government, is reported to have claimed almost £35,000 in two years for mortgage interest payments on a London flat when he owned a house just a few hundred yards away. He said that the house was bought and furnished with his own money, while he bought the flat to carry out his parliamentary duties.
According to The Daily Telegraph, Alan Duncan, the Shadow Leader of the Commons, claimed more than £4,000 for work on his garden over three years before agreeing with the Fees Office that the spending “could be considered excessive”.
He said yesterday: “It was me who raised the issue of gardening costs with the Fees Office. Although it was a legitimate claim, we agreed that it might be seen as too large a single item and therefore I did not claim it.”
David Willetts, the Shadow Universities Secretary, claimed more than £100 for workmen to replace 25 light bulbs at his home, but refused to reimburse him for a £175 dog enclosure and £750 for a shed base. Cheryl Gillan, the Shadow Welsh Secretary, claimed for a £3.69 bag of dry dog meal.
This came as HM Revenue & Customs was expected to investigate whether MPs had breached tax law by claiming expenses that were not necessary for them to carry out their jobs.
Tax experts said last night that HMRC wanted to look at the expenses MPs had filed for the cost of furnishing and maintaining a second home and for feeding themselves when they were away from their main property.
While the Fees Office in Parliament is responsible for signing off MPs’ expenses, politicians still have to abide by tax law. According to clause 292 of the Income Tax, Earnings and Pensions Act 2003, a clause specifically written for MPs and voted through by them, politicians can only claim expenses legitimately incurred while carrying out their duties away from home.
It is believed that HMRC is embarrassed by evidence of how some MPs have milked the lax expenses system in Parliament because it had assumed that the Fees Office was policing the process. A spokesman for HMRC declined to comment yesterday.
The inquiry could result in MPs being handed tax bills retrospectively.
As the row over MPs’ expenses raged yesterday, Hazel Blears, the Communities Secretary, was forced to explain why she had not paid capital gains tax on the profit of £45,000 she had made when she sold a flat in Kennington, South London.
Ms Blears was accused of telling HMRC that the London flat was her primary residence, and therefore exempt from capital gains tax, while simultaneously declaring it as her second home to the House of Commons. Ms Blears insisted yesterday that she had adhered to the rules.
It was also revealed yesterday that Kitty Ussher, the Work and Pensions Minister, had exploited the lax rules by carrying out a £20,000 refurbishment of her Brixton home. She had bought it in 2000 for £273,000 and began claiming for the work on it within a year of being elected and wrote a 12-point letter to the Fees Office to find out how much she could get the taxpayer to cover.
She wrote: “Most of the ceilings have Artex coverings. Three dimensional swirls. It could be a matter of taste, but this counts as ‘dilapidations’ in my book! Can the ACA pay for the ceilings to be plastered and repainted.”
Conservative charge sheet
Andrew Lansley, Shadow Health Secretary: Allegation: renovated country cottage then flipped second home to claim furnishings on London flat. Response: said he switched main family home when daughter started school
Michael Gove, Shadow Education Secretary: Allegation: spent £7,000 on London property, then flipped to one in Surrey to claim £13,000 in stamp duty and other fees. Response: moved house as unable to buy house he was renting
Alan Duncan Shadow Leader of House: Allegation: warned about “excessive” behaviour for claiming £4,000 gardening expenses. Response: says he agreed to drop claim because it would be seen as too large for a single item.
David Willetts, Shadow Universities Secretary: Allegation: claimed more than £100 to replace 25 light bulbs at home. Response: “We needed the attention of an electrician.”
Francis Maude, Shadow Minister for Cabinet Office: Allegation: tried to claim mortgage on family home in Sussex, and claimed £35,000 in mortgage payments on London flat close to property he already owned. Response: claims he was unaware of rule change and renovated London flats with own money
Oliver Letwin, chairman of policy team: Allegation: received £2,000 to replace leaking pipe under a tennis court. Response: said he was ordered to repair pipe by water firm
Chris Grayling, Shadow Home Secretary: Allegation: received thousands of pounds to renovate London flat 17 miles from family home. Response: said that using one of his existing properties would not have saved taxpayer money
Cheryl Gillan, Shadow Welsh Secretary: Allegation: claimed for dog food. Response: apology and will repay cost | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
