This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/7842402.stm

The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 5 Version 6
Brown backs down in expenses row Brown backs down in expenses row
(about 1 hour later)
The government has shelved plans to prevent the publication of more details of MPs' expenses. Ministers have shelved plans to exempt MPs' expenses details from the Freedom of Information Act, after the Tories and Lib Dems said they would fight it.
Downing Street had indicated Labour MPs would be required to support proposals exempting such information from Freedom of Information laws. Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the government had thought it had cross-party agreement but would now "continue to consult on the matter".
But a planned House of Commons vote has now been dropped after opposition parties refused to back the government. Campaigners said it was a victory for "people power" after a web protest.
The Conservatives accused ministers of a "u-turn" while the Lib Dems said it was a "humiliating climbdown". The Conservatives accused ministers of a "U-turn" while the Lib Dems said it was a "humiliating climbdown".
Long-running case MPs were due to vote on Thursday on plans to exempt their expenses from the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act.
The row over expenses followed a long-running Freedom of Information case in which campaigners sought to get details of MPs' expenses, which totalled £87.6m in 2006-7, published. Free vote
Last year the High Court ordered the Commons authorities to publish details, including all receipts, to back up claims made by 14 MPs under their second homes allowance. Labour MPs were to be ordered to vote through the changes, while the Tories and Lib Dems said they would instruct their MPs to vote against them.
It had been expected that all MPs' expenses details would then be published but Commons leader Harriet Harman told MPs last week the government was bringing forward a plan to exempt MPs' expenses from the scope of the FOI Act. Mr Brown was challenged about it by two Tory backbenchers at prime minister's questions who asked why there "should there be one law for the people and another for politicians".
At the start of PMQs Mr Brown told MPs there would be a free vote on the matter.
I believe all-party support is important and we will continue to consult on that matter Gordon Brown Q&A: What the row is all aboutI believe all-party support is important and we will continue to consult on that matter Gordon Brown Q&A: What the row is all about
This would have seen expenses published under 26 headings but not the details of claims for individual items. He said: "We thought we had agreement on the Freedom of Information Act as part of this wider package."
Downing Street had indicated that Labour MPs would be expected to support this policy in a vote on Thursday but the Conservatives and Lib Dems said they would oppose the move. "Recently that support that we believed we had from the main opposition party was withdrawn. On this particular matter, I believe all-party support is important and we will continue to consult on that matter."
However, shortly after the end of prime minister's questions, the government revealed the vote on the FOI proposal would not take place. But less than an hour later the government said the plan would be shelved.
BBC political correspondent Iain Watson said the move would be seen as a "screeching u-turn" by the government. 'Not acceptable'
Ms Harman said the vote had been abandoned because of the "lack of cross-party support" and confirmed she would hold further discussions on how to proceed. The High Court ruled last year that details of claims made under the second homes allowance, including receipts, should be published in the interests of transparency.
'Agreement' Campaigners had denounced the planned Commons vote as effectively overturning the High Court ruling and said MPs were trying to exempt themselves from a law had they created.
But she defended the policy, saying it would "provide a legal underpinning for a package of changes which would achieve greater transparency in the publication of what MPs spend". MPs will still vote on Thursday on separate proposals to tighten up auditing procedures, involving the National Audit Office in some checks, as well as some changes to the Commons rule book on expenses.
MPs will still vote on Thursday on separate proposals to tighten up the auditing of expenses and revisions to the expenses rule book. The Conservatives denied they had initially struck a deal with Labour not to oppose the changes.
Earlier, Mr Brown blamed the Conservatives for what he said was a breakdown of a previous consensus over the way forward. Shadow Commons leader Alan Duncan said it was "not acceptable" that, having made the FOI law, MPs could go back and change it because they did not like it.
"We thought we had agreement on the FOI Act as part of this wider package," he told MPs. "Recently that support that we believed we had from the main opposition party was withdrawn. Some MPs are clearly desperate to prevent the release of past expenses claims Maurice FrankelCampaign for Freedom of Information
If passed, this order would have had a catastrophic impact on the reputation of Parliament Peter Facey, Unlock Democracy "I don't think that retrospective escape route was really acceptable," he said.
"So on this particular matter, I believe all-party support is important and we will continue to consult on that matter." He said the government had "backed down" because the Tories had decided to whip their MPs to vote against it.
The Conservatives denied they had initially struck a deal with Labour not to oppose the changes, saying there was "no question" of the party ever backing the proposals.
Shadow Commons leader Alan Duncan said: "What was wrong with this is that Parliament made the law - the law included Parliament in it and now we're looking backwards and saying 'Oops, we don't like it'."
He added that he did not think a "retrospective escape route was really acceptable".
The Lib Dems, who described the FOI exemption proposal as "outrageous", said the decision was a "humiliating climbdown" by the government.The Lib Dems, who described the FOI exemption proposal as "outrageous", said the decision was a "humiliating climbdown" by the government.
"It is also a victory for everyone who thinks that politicians should be open and accountable to the people who pay their wages," said party leader Nick Clegg."It is also a victory for everyone who thinks that politicians should be open and accountable to the people who pay their wages," said party leader Nick Clegg.
Freedom of Information campaigners welcomed the decision, saying the proposal to limit disclosure would have made MPs the only public officials immune from public scrutiny. 'Robust audit'
Freedom of information campaigners welcomed the decision, saying the proposal to limit disclosure would have made MPs the only public officials immune from public scrutiny.
But they warned it was not the end of the matter and similar plans could resurface in future. Maurice Frankel, director of the Campaign for Freedom of Information said: "Some MPs are clearly desperate to prevent the release of past expenses claims which are likely to have exceeded what could reasonably be justified to the public."
An internet campaign by MySociety urging MPs to vote against the change attracted more than 6,000 supporters on the Facebook website.An internet campaign by MySociety urging MPs to vote against the change attracted more than 6,000 supporters on the Facebook website.
"If passed, this order would have had a catastrophic impact on the reputation of Parliament," said Peter Facey, director of the pressure group Unlock Democracy. Peter Facey, of pressure group Unlock Democracy, warned if the vote had gone ahead it would have had "a catastrophic impact on the reputation of Parliament." He urged the Commons to publish all expenses details "at the earliest opportunity".
"We now call on the parliamentary authorities to publish MPs expenses at the earliest opportunity." But Commons leader Harriet Harman told the BBC: "We didn't think that it was right that there should be 1.2 million receipts, every single receipt for every ream of paper that's brought, should be actually scanned and then published because it would be a blizzard of information at great expense.
"I think the public are entitled to know there are clear rules, that there's robust audit and those rules are obeyed, and they're entitled to know how much each MP is spending on what. And that's what we'd agreed to do."