Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Revealed: another way MPs are at it

'Loophole' allows cash to be funnelled to local parties

Brian Brady,Whitehall Editor
Saturday 16 May 2009 19:00 EDT
Comments
(david sandison)

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Britain's MPs are taking advantage of another allowances "loophole" that lets them channel taxpayers' money into the network of local constituency associations around the country.

More than 100 MPs are using expenses, paid from the public purse, to pay their often impoverished constituency parties thousands of pounds for facilities and services such as rent and secretarial help, an Independent on Sunday investigation has revealed.

The cash is funnelled into general accounts, which could be used to fund political activities including canvassing and campaigning. The MPs, who include David Cameron and nine members of his Shadow Cabinet, insist they are paying for legitimate business services and that the arrangements have the blessing of House of Commons authorities.

But critics claim that often the cash is being used to supplement the income of local parties – and amounts to state funding for party-political campaigning. One senior Tory claimed yesterday he had battled with his own local association to prevent them from getting their hands on the cash, which is paid through the incidental expenses provision. "They saw the money as theirs," he said. "I said they couldn't have it because they were not providing me with any services."

The former Conservative MP Bob Spink said he had asked the House of Commons authorities for their "protection" from officials whom he claimed had demanded that he contributed cash from his parliamentary allowances to his local Tory party.

Parliamentary regulations say MPs must negotiate contracts for accommodation and services and lodge a copy of their agreement with House of Commons authorities. The Green Book setting out the rules also declares that MPs "must avoid any arrangement which may give rise to the suggestion that public money is being diverted for the benefit of a political organisation". An IoS investigation of hundreds of local party accounts filed with the Electoral Commission reveals that more than half the 193 Conservative MPs, at least 24 Lib Dem and 16 Labour MPs are paying their local party associations for facilities and services including rent and secretarial help.

The shadow leader of the House of Commons, Alan Duncan, who paid an £8,000 "rental contribution" to his local party in 2007, said it was a market rate and included heating and other services. Labour MP Jim Dowd spent £16,250 renting offices from his Lewisham West and Penge constituency party. Party leader Nick Clegg handed over £8,040 for rented office space and services to his Sheffield constituency party.

A Conservative spokesman said it was "perfectly legitimate for MPs to use their allowances to fund offices in their constituencies relating to parliamentary business, as MPs of all parties do".

Mark Wallace, campaign director at the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "Just because they are filing details of the arrangements with the parliamentary authorities doesn't mean they are automatically beyond reproach."

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in