Quote:Expenses watchdog to name MPs who submitted claims in breach of rules
Ipsa to name and shame dozens of MPs who submitted claims wholly or partly in breach of rules

Polly Curtis, Whitehall correspondent
The Guardian, Thursday 3 February 2011


Former MP Jim Devine, who is accused of submitting false invoices. Expenses watchdog Ipsa has said it will name and shame rule breakers. Photograph: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

The expenses watchdog will name and shame tomorrow dozens of MPs responsible for submitting around 150 claims subsequently found to be in breach of the rules and rejected.

Another 100 claims were only partly reimbursed by officials at the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority last September and October because these partially broke the rules.

The number of rejected claims is down substantially on the first four months of the scheme, which was brought in to clean up the system after the expenses scandal that rocked parliament in 2009. From May to the beginning of September there were 1,600 rejected claims a rate of 400 a month but today Ipsa will publish the latest tranche, in which rejections and partial payments are understood to average around 125 a month.

The dramatic drop in rejected claims will be interpreted as evidence that the system is bedding in and preventing the widespread abuse seen in the previous parliament. But the fact that those who break the rules will be named for the first time is likely to reignite the row over MPs' abuse of expenses.

In December, Ipsa published details of expenses claims in the first four months of the scheme and the 1,600 claims rejected with the names redacted. The watchdog argued that it should keep MPs' names secret for the first few months of the scheme to allow it to settle in.

That report revealed some MPs making duplicate claims, or failing to provide enough evidence for claims, and others claiming for things not permitted under the new rules, such as first class travel.

One MP was refused £338 for a shredder, another tried to claim £1,057 for advertising, and a third was refused £1,085 for "contingencies".

This time such breaches will be published along with the names of the MPs responsible.

MPs are locked in a furious battle with Ipsa, with many arguing that trust in politics will never be renewed if Ipsa pursues its plans to publish expenses every two months creating what some see as a "witch hunt".

Ipsa has said that transparency in the system is crucial to restoring faith, but it is reviewing its expenses schemes and consulting about changes. David Cameron has said that Ipsa has to reform by April, in particularly to become more "family friendly", or face being forced to change.

That row is playing out in parliament against a backdrop of court cases against MPs, most of whom have already left parliament.

Last month the former Labour MP David Chaytor who stood down from Bury North at the general election was the first MP to be jailed after fraudulently claiming almost £20,000. He was sentenced to 18 months.

Eric Illsley, serving Labour MP for Barnsley Central, is due to be sentenced this month for wrongly claiming £14,000, and former Livingston MP Jim Devine is in court this week accused of submitting false invoices.

Quote:Commons leader attacks MPs' expenses watchdog as latest claims are published

Sir George Young publishes damning assessment of Ipsa on day it names and shame dozens of MPs who submitted claims wholly or partly in breach of rules

Polly Curtis, Whitehall correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 3 February 2011 18.17 GMT


Sir George Young, criticised Ipsa for 'failing' to support MPs in their work, and said it had 'unsatisfactory features' which are 'at best distracting, and at worst impeding'. Photograph: Graeme Robertson for the Guardian

Sir George Young, the leader of the house of Commons, today delivered a devastating critique of the expenses watchdog as it published the latest tranche of claims, naming and shaming 125 MPs who had claims rejected.

The list includes the ministers Ed Davey, Ed Vaizey Maria Miller and Peter Luff and Labour grandees, among them Jack Straw and Harriet Harman.

The Conservative MP for Loughborough, Nicky Morgan, had a £77 claim for hosting a "big society" reception rejected, though it was subsequently resubmitted and paid, and her colleague in Hereford, Jesse Norman, had the largest sum rejected £1,504.01 for furniture for his office.

Overall, the rejected claims amounted to just £15,352 out of the total £3.64m expenses bill for September and October.

The number of MPs rejected has fallen substantially compared with the first four months of the new scheme, which was introduced to clean up the expenses system after the scandal that rocked parliament in 2009.

But today is the first time those who have had their expenses rejected have been named.

Young published his official response to a consultation on the future of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) moments before the latest tranche of expenses was revealed.

In it, he accused Ipsa of "failing" to support MPs in their work, and said it had "unsatisfactory features" which are "at best distracting, and at worst impeding".

He called for widespread reforms, but insisted Ipsa should remain independent of the House of Commons. It is understood that the prime minister, David Cameron, has seen the document.

The paper will curry favour with backbenchers who are furious about the bureaucracy and higher costs of the new expenses system. Some are calling for it to be entirely scrapped and replaced with a daily allowance for MPs to end the publication of receipts and a perceived "witch hunt" against them.

The publication of all expenses claims for September and October last year revealed that:

71 MPs had 154 individual claims fully rejected, with a total value of £11,500. Another 69 MPs had 94 claims partly rejected, with a total value of £3,800. Overall, 248 claims from 125 MPs were either partly or wholly rejected, amounting to £15,352 out of the total expenses bill of £3.64m for the period.

Four ministers were refused payments after failing to provide sufficient evidence in the form of receipts to make claims. The employment minister, Ed Davey, was refused £115.64 for a phone bill after he inadvertently failed to provide sufficient details. The correct documents have now been re-submitted, he said, adding: "It is taking huge amounts of staff time which previously used to be directed at helping constituents. We are just trying to do our jobs. The whole system is getting in our way."

The culture minister, Ed Vaizey, was refused £4.75 to cover the cost of an intern's lunch. Vaizey said the claim was permissible, but that Ipsa had lost the receipt. "It's good for MPs because it reminds you what happens when you set up a quango," he said. "The public has to deal with things like the Criminal Records Bureau. This is a taste of our own medicine."

The employment minister, Maria Miller, was refused £13.20 for a congestion charge fee and dinner in the Commons. She could not be contacted for comment today.

Peter Luff, the Tory defence minister, had a £286.50 telephone bill rejected, as well as a £12.70 claim for "teas, coffee and biscuits" because he did not provide sufficient documentation. Another two claims, together worth £195, for utility bills in his constituency office were rejected because Ipsa deemed them "not claimable". Luff said it was a problem with documentation, which was part of a service charge, and he had now resubmitted the proper evidence. "I am ringing Ipsa to complain about this. Ipsa shouldn't have put it in public domain," he said.

Straw had £609 from his business rates claims withheld after providing insufficient evidence. He said in a statement: "The claim was witheld temporarily because of a misunderstanding of the documentation required when staff were trying to come to grips with the routine. It was later repaid."

Harman was refused £75 for the hire of a hall for a constituency surgery for the same reason. She told Sky news the claim was resubmitted and subsequently accepted.

Overall, MPs were paid £668,653.40 in accommodation costs over the period.

Norman had the £1,504.01 claim for office furniture rejected because it was not allowed under the rules. He claimed Ipsa had subsequently admitted it was mistaken and paid the money in full. "We've been punctilious in obeying the rules. I haven't claimed any personal expenses, but by not checking the claims there is no case to publish this. They should have recognised the outcome rather than the process," he said.

Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the Tory grandee and the chair of the standards and privileges committee in the Commons, had five claims, totalling £171.80, rejected two taxis, two bills for newspapers and a travelcard for an intern.

Four rejections were technical errors and were subsequently paid, and only one a £9.99 claim for photos for a pass to a Commonwealth conference was rejected as the Foreign Office should have paid.

"With regards my own experience I am mildly irritated that Ipsa publish unallowed claims without explaining why they were not allowed in my own case, there were three claims which were allowable, but we applied at wrong time," he said.

The Tory MP for Broadland, Keith Simpson, had a £1,230.23 claim for advertising disallowed. Ipsa said he had provided insufficient evidence for the claim.

Morgan said her £77 claim for a big society reception at the House of Commons, in which local volunteers were invited to meet the minister Nick Hurd, was subsequently paid out.

She had to pay for the teas and coffees in advance and submitted the claim before the event had happened, which is against the rules. She said: "I'm a new MP and we are having to deal with the system that's put in place for problems from the past.

"We're all feeling our way. Transparency is a good thing, but my concern is about how the explanations are conveyed.

"It was a mistake to put it in before the event, the flaw in the system is not that it's come up but that it doesn't say it was subsequently paid."

She said she had been forced to take out personal loans and rely on her husband's income to subsidise the start-up costs of becoming an MP, but that Ipsa was aware of the problems and was improving the system.

Downing Street said Cameron believed Ipsa was not working properly and the problems needed to be dealt with.

"You cannot have a system that costs £6m a year to administer the expenses of 650 people," the prime minister's official spokesman said.

"Ipsa was set up quite rapidly following the expenses scandal. Clearly there are problems with the way it is working. The prime minister's view is that we have got to deal with this."

Quote:MPs' expenses claims that were rejected and why
From an intern's lunch to office furniture, here are some of the rejected expenses claims

Share

Polly Curtis
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 3 February 2011 20.17 GMT
Article history
Ed Davey, the Lib Dem employment minister, was refused £115.64 for a phone bill after he failed to provide sufficient evidence. The correct documents have now been resubmitted, he said. "It is taking huge amounts of staff time which previously used to be directed at helping constituents. We are just trying to do our jobs. The whole system is getting in our way," he said.

Peter Luff, the Tory defence minister, had a £286.50 telephone bill rejected and £12.70 for "teas, coffee and biscuits" because he did not provide sufficient documentation. Another two claims for utility bills in his constituency office were rejected because Ipsa deemed them "not claimable". Luff said it was a problem with the documentation, which was part of a service charge, and that he had now resubmitted the evidence. "I am ringing Ipsa to complain about this. Ipsa shouldn't have put this in the public domain," he said.

Jack Straw, the former Labour home secretary, had £609 from his business rates claims withheld after providing insufficient evidence. He said in a statement: "The claim was withheld temporarily because of a misunderstanding of the documentation required. It was later repaid."

Jesse Norman, the Tory MP for Hereford and champion of "compassionate Conservatism", had the largest sum rejected £1,504.01 for office furniture. He claimed that Ipsa had subsequently admitted its mistake and paid the money in full. "We've been punctilious in obeying the rules. I haven't claimed any personal expenses, but by not checking the claims there is no case to publish this. They should have recognised the outcome rather than the process," he said.

Nicky Morgan, the Tory MP for Loughborough, had a £77 claim for a "big society" reception at the house of Commons rejected because she claimed it before the event took place. The receipt was later resubmitted and paid in full. She said: "Transparency is a good thing, but my concern is about how the explanations are conveyed. The flaw in the system is not that it's come up but that it doesn't say it was subsequently paid."

Harriet Harman,the deputy Labour leader, was refused £75 for the hire of a hall for a constituency surgery for the same reason. The claim was resubmitted and subsequently accepted.

Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the former chair of the standards and privileges committee in the Commons, had five claims totalling £171.80 rejected two taxis, two bills for newspapers and a travelcard for an intern. Four were technical errors and subsequently paid, and only one a £9.99 claim for photos for a pass to a Commonwealth conference was rejected on the grounds that the Foreign Office should have paid. "I am mildly irritated that Ipsa published unallowed claims without explaining why they were not allowed."

Ed Vaizey, the culture minister, was refused £4.75 to cover the cost of an intern's lunch. Vaizey said that the claim was permissible but that Ipsa had lost the receipt. "It's good for MPs because it reminds you what happens when you set up a quango. The public has to deal with things like the Criminal Records Bureau. This is a taste of our own medicine."

The employment minister, Maria Miller, was refused £13.20 for a congestion charge fee and dinner in the Commons. She could not be contacted.

Magda Hassan Wrote:Thieving bung bunch of liars and spongers. They should be subjected to the same scrutiny as those receiving welfare benefits and experience the same penalties for false or wrong declarations. And they should have their salary stopped if they breach the rules more than once.
:ballchain: