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/8496729.stm

The article has changed 27 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 8 Version 9
MPs told to repay £1.1m expenses MPs told to repay £1.1m expenses
(9 minutes later)
MPs should repay £1.12m of their second home expenses, an audit of their claims dating back to 2004 has said.MPs should repay £1.12m of their second home expenses, an audit of their claims dating back to 2004 has said.
Sir Thomas Legg recommended that 390 MPs, more than half, should repay £1.3m after reviewing five years of claims. Sir Thomas Legg recommended that 390 MPs, more than half the current and past MPs reviewed, should repay £1.3m.
Some MPs say the way Sir Thomas carried out the audit was "sloppy" and £180,000 was cut off the total after appeals.Some MPs say the way Sir Thomas carried out the audit was "sloppy" and £180,000 was cut off the total after appeals.
Sir Thomas said the expenses system was "deeply flawed", the rules "vague" and it had been up to MPs to "self certify" the propriety of their claims.Sir Thomas said the expenses system was "deeply flawed", the rules "vague" and it had been up to MPs to "self certify" the propriety of their claims.
MPs had to sign a declaration with each claim saying "that I incurred these costs wholly, exclusively and necessarily to enable me to stay overnight away from my only or main home for the purpose of performing my duties as a Member of Parliament".
In his report he pointed out there had been "no audit of any kind" of second homes expenses during the period he covered adding: "Neither internal nor external auditors could 'go behind the member's signature'."In his report he pointed out there had been "no audit of any kind" of second homes expenses during the period he covered adding: "Neither internal nor external auditors could 'go behind the member's signature'."
'Culture of deference'
He also said expenses officials had a "culture of deference" to MPs and there had been a "prevailing lack of transparency".He also said expenses officials had a "culture of deference" to MPs and there had been a "prevailing lack of transparency".
The report said £800,000 had been repaid already - some voluntarily, unconnected to Sir Thomas's demands - since April 2009, the month before the scandal broke.The report said £800,000 had been repaid already - some voluntarily, unconnected to Sir Thomas's demands - since April 2009, the month before the scandal broke.
The highest amount recommended for repayment, following the appeals process, is £42,458 for junior minister Barbara Follett. The highest amount recommended for repayment, following the appeals process, is £42,458 for Labour junior minister Barbara Follett.
WHAT MPs MUST REPAY £4,000 for hotel stays£711,000 for mortgage/rent£12,000 for food30 £10,000 for utilities£35,000 for 59 Council Tax/Rates£23,000 for phone & telecoms£105,000 for cleaning£81,000 on service/maintenance£73,000 repairs/insurance/security: £252,000 - 182 other payments:Total: £1,305,000 Q&A: MP expenses row explained Key points: MP expense repaymentsWHAT MPs MUST REPAY £4,000 for hotel stays£711,000 for mortgage/rent£12,000 for food30 £10,000 for utilities£35,000 for 59 Council Tax/Rates£23,000 for phone & telecoms£105,000 for cleaning£81,000 on service/maintenance£73,000 repairs/insurance/security: £252,000 - 182 other payments:Total: £1,305,000 Q&A: MP expenses row explained Key points: MP expense repayments
She was paid a total of £34,776.30 from April 2004 to November 2008 for mobile security patrols and £8,908.36 for six telephone lines at her second home between April 2004 and November 2008.She was paid a total of £34,776.30 from April 2004 to November 2008 for mobile security patrols and £8,908.36 for six telephone lines at her second home between April 2004 and November 2008.
Sir Thomas's review and report, which cost £1.16m, says the patrols went beyond the "basic security measures" allowed and the number of phone lines was "excessive". Ms Follett has already repaid £32,976.Sir Thomas's review and report, which cost £1.16m, says the patrols went beyond the "basic security measures" allowed and the number of phone lines was "excessive". Ms Follett has already repaid £32,976.
MPs' appeals Other large repayment requests were about £60,000 in total from husband and wife Conservative MPs Andrew MacKay and Julie Kirkbride and £24,878 from shadow defence secretary Liam Fox - all of whom have already repaid the money.
MPs were given the option of appealing against Sir Thomas's recommendations and about 70 are known to have done so - 44 were successful in getting the demands either reduced or overturned.MPs were given the option of appealing against Sir Thomas's recommendations and about 70 are known to have done so - 44 were successful in getting the demands either reduced or overturned.
Successful appeals
Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin - who Sir Thomas recommended should repay £63,250, after renting his second home from his sister in law - appealed and had the amount reduced by £27,000.
The ex-Conservative minister Peter Lilley was also asked to repay £41,057 in relation to a mortgage taken out on a property he had originally bought using a loan from his wife.
ANALYSIS Ben Wright, BBC political correspondent Throughout the whole expenses saga there have been plenty of MPs who have felt aggrieved.ANALYSIS Ben Wright, BBC political correspondent Throughout the whole expenses saga there have been plenty of MPs who have felt aggrieved.
They say there was a system in place which they were encouraged to use, yet they are now being punished for doing so.They say there was a system in place which they were encouraged to use, yet they are now being punished for doing so.
That feeling of injustice still hasn't gone away - in fact for those who have lost appeals it may be greater now than ever.That feeling of injustice still hasn't gone away - in fact for those who have lost appeals it may be greater now than ever.
But despite this I think we're unlikely to see many - or indeed, any - MPs complaining publicly today.But despite this I think we're unlikely to see many - or indeed, any - MPs complaining publicly today.
Sir Thomas is clearly incredibly unimpressed with them, to put it mildly, and I think most will now decide it best to swallow their objections and try to draw a line under the entire sorry mess..Sir Thomas is clearly incredibly unimpressed with them, to put it mildly, and I think most will now decide it best to swallow their objections and try to draw a line under the entire sorry mess..
Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin - who Sir Thomas recommended should repay £63,250, after renting his second home from his sister in law - appealed and had the amount reduced by £27,000. The ex-Conservative minister Peter Lilley was also asked to repay £41,057 in relation to a mortgage taken out on a property he had originally bought using a loan from his wife.
Sir Thomas Legg judged that he should repay the mortgage interest claimed back - but the appeals process overturned that entirely.Sir Thomas Legg judged that he should repay the mortgage interest claimed back - but the appeals process overturned that entirely.
The judge who ruled on appeals, Sir Paul Kennedy, said each case had to be looked at "on its own merits".The judge who ruled on appeals, Sir Paul Kennedy, said each case had to be looked at "on its own merits".
Many MPs complained that Sir Thomas had retrospectively applied limits to claims for gardening and cleaning that were not in place at the time - and demanded they pay back the difference.Many MPs complained that Sir Thomas had retrospectively applied limits to claims for gardening and cleaning that were not in place at the time - and demanded they pay back the difference.
But Sir Thomas rejected that criticism, saying the rules stated the expense could "only be used as reimbursement for specific and proportionate expenditure .. needed for the performance of Parliamentary duties".But Sir Thomas rejected that criticism, saying the rules stated the expense could "only be used as reimbursement for specific and proportionate expenditure .. needed for the performance of Parliamentary duties".
He said the fact that the fees office and MPs at the time "acted in apparent ignorance of the rules and standards then in force cannot cure the invalidity of the payments".He said the fact that the fees office and MPs at the time "acted in apparent ignorance of the rules and standards then in force cannot cure the invalidity of the payments".
'Vague' rules
He also criticised a "widespread lack of proper evidence on the record from MPs to support substantial payments" - including mortgage claims which were "expressly required by the rules"He also criticised a "widespread lack of proper evidence on the record from MPs to support substantial payments" - including mortgage claims which were "expressly required by the rules"
In his report Sir Thomas criticised the "deeply flawed" expenses system for second homes adding: "In particular, the rules were vague, and MPs were themselves self-certifying as to the propriety of their use of the allowance. Sir Thomas criticised the "deeply flawed" expenses system adding: "In particular, the rules were vague, and MPs were themselves self-certifying as to the propriety of their use of the allowance.
"Taken with the prevailing lack of transparency and the 'culture of deference', this meant that the [Commons] fees office's decisions lacked legitimacy; and many of them were in fact mistaken."
'Culture of deference'
He added: "The saga of MPs' expenses and freedom of information has been traumatic and painful. Public confidence has been damaged, and the scars will no doubt take time to heal.
"But there is a positive side. In responding, our national institutions, including a free press, an independent judiciary and in the end the executive government, political parties and above all the House of Commons itself, are showing that, when things do go wrong, we have together the will and the means to put matters right, heal and reform the systems and the culture, and move forward."
REPAYMENT REQUESTS 3 MPs - £40,000+56 MPs - £5,000-£40,000182 MPs - £1,000-£5,000149 MPs -£100 - £1,000REPAYMENT REQUESTS 3 MPs - £40,000+56 MPs - £5,000-£40,000182 MPs - £1,000-£5,000149 MPs -£100 - £1,000
The report also notes that two former MPs have not responded to requests for repayments by Legg - which went out last October. "Taken with the prevailing lack of transparency and the 'culture of deference', this meant that the [Commons] fees office's decisions lacked legitimacy; and many of them were in fact mistaken."
The expenses saga had been "traumatic and painful" he said but the response to it had shown that "when things do go wrong, we have together the will and the means to put matters right".
The report notes that two former MPs have not responded to requests for repayments by Legg - which went out last October.
Former Labour MPs John Lyons and Ivor Caplin, who both left Parliament in 2005, were asked for more than £17,000 each.Former Labour MPs John Lyons and Ivor Caplin, who both left Parliament in 2005, were asked for more than £17,000 each.
It is not clear if they can be forced to repay the money. MPs who still have their seats and refuse to pay may have the money docked from their pay or allowances. MPs who still have their seats and refuse to pay may have the money docked from their pay or allowances.
Conservative leader David Cameron told the BBC earlier: "What is absolutely essential is that MPs pay back all this money that's been identified - those MPs who refuse to pay it back, they should have it taken off their salaries or their redundancy payments - that's got to happen." The prime minister's spokesman said Gordon Brown was fully supportive of Sir Thomas Legg's review and that he encouraged MPs to pay back money owed as quickly as possible and it was an important step in overhauling a discredited system.
Conservative leader David Cameron told the BBC: "What is absolutely essential is that MPs pay back all this money that's been identified - those MPs who refuse to pay it back, they should have it taken off their salaries or their redundancy payments - that's got to happen."
Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg told the BBC he expected Sir Thomas's report would be "uncomfortable reading for a large number of MPs" but added: "I hope it'll be the final chapter in this rotten Parliament so we can look forward to a new Parliament with new rules."Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg told the BBC he expected Sir Thomas's report would be "uncomfortable reading for a large number of MPs" but added: "I hope it'll be the final chapter in this rotten Parliament so we can look forward to a new Parliament with new rules."