Expenses: Fiddling MPs will get away with it

MPs are set to win the battle to hang on to their fiddled expenses as the Westminster sleaze inquiry descended into chaos last night.

The Wesminster sleaze inquiry descended into chaos last night The Wesminster sleaze inquiry descended into chaos last night

Auditor Sir Thomas Legg will confirm today that dozens of MPs have already had demands for repayment slashed on appeal.

And last night fresh questions were raised over the legality of the audit of the discredited House of Commons expenses system.

As a result, MPs could challenge in the courts demands to pay back any of the taxpayer-funded cash.

Hundreds of thousands of pounds were wrongly claimed for gardening, decorating and other lavish perks funded through the “second homes” allowance. It also emerged last night that the Legg inquiry will cost taxpayers more than can be raised in repayments from MPs.

The bill for former Civil Service chief Sir Thomas’s work hit £1.1million last month, while repayments from disgraced MPs would total less than £1million.

Doubt was cast on the Legg inquiry by Sir Paul Kennedy, a former High Court judge who has been hearing appeals from MPs protesting over the repayment demands.

He is understood to have written a section of today’s report questioning the legality of imposing retrospective limits on previous expenses claims.

A large number of the 80 MPs who appealed have had their repayment demands scrapped or significantly reduced.

A source close to the inquiry said: “Many others will now be regretting that they did not fight.”

The intervention will shatter Gordon Brown’s hopes of finally putting the hugely damaging expenses scandal to rest.

Campaigners for taxpayers were outraged at the suggestion that MPs may wriggle out of repaying the public money they wrongfully claimed.

Mark Wallace, of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “It would be a shocking own goal if Sir Pauls Kennedy’s comments end up being used by MPs to evade repayment of expenses.

“The one thing taxpayers should be able to expect is that the person dealing with appeals believes the audit itself is valid.”

Criticising the £1.1million cost of the Legg inquiry, Mr Wallace added: “It is essential that audits in future are more affordable and regular. A big part of this cost is due to the failure of the Commons Fees Office to audit MPs expenses properly.”

It is understood that a bitter rift between Sir Thomas and Sir Paul has thrown the inquiry into chaos. While Sir Thomas hammered MPs with demands for repayment, Sir Paul rejected many of his rulings in principle.

In letters to MPs, Sir Paul expressed sympathy about “the arbitrary imposition of an unprecedented retrospective limit and is therefore unfair”. He told individual MPs: “I understand entirely your sense of indignation.”

His remarks in today’s report are understood to conflict with the conclusion of Sir Thomas, who is scathing in his condemnation of the way MPs milked the system to grab cash.

Many MPs were furious about repayment demands imposed by Sir Thomas. They were angry that he imposed limits for expenditure on items such as gardening and cleaning even though none existed at the time.

The Prime Minister was hit with a demand for more than £12,000, some £10,000 of which related to “excessive” spending on cleaning. The 80 MPs who appealed against repayment demands learned the results from Sir Paul last week. Full details will be made public today in the official report on the audit process.

A spokeswoman for the inquiry said: “I cannot comment on the contents of the report. You will have to wait until it is published.”

MPs who have already made some of the conclusions of the report public include Tory backbencher Bernard Jenkin, who had been asked to return £63,250 after using the second home allowance to rent a property from his sister-in-law. However, Sir Paul has halved that sum after Mr Jenkin argued he should repay only the money claimed after 2006 – when Commons rules were changed to ban renting from relatives.

The Tory MP for Thanet North, Roger Gale, who has been heavily critical of Sir Thomas, said he had been cleared after accepting that some £2,100 claimed for mobile phone bills had been “permissible” under the rules at the time. Others believed to have been cleared on appeal include Liberal Democrat frontbencher Jeremy Browne, and Labour MPs Ann Cryer and Frank Cook. Mr Brown’s spokesman said: “The Prime Minister supports fully the review of expenses and the way it has been handled.”

But the chaos deepened yesterday when standards watchdog Sir Christopher Kelly indicated he could quit over moves to water down his proposals for reforming the expenses system.

SUNDAY EXPRESS POLL: IS DAVID CAMERON RIGHT TO SAY BURGLARS RENOUNCE THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS THE MOMENT THEY STEP ACROSS YOUR THRESHOLD?

Would you like to receive news notifications from Daily Express?