Carry on claiming home expenses, accused peers told as loophole 'lets them off hook'

Published 22nd Oct 2009

Peers accused of abusing their expenses have been given the green light to carry on claiming.

Anti- sleaze campaigners attacked an 'outrageous' ruling that insisted members of the House of Lords are free to nominate any property they like as their main home.

The claims of at least 20 peers have been called into question over recent months.

They have been accused of raking in large sums from the taxpayer based on dubious claims about the location of their main address.

Peers with long-established homes in London have variously claimed their main address is a Welsh or Cornish holiday home, a rarely used flat in Bath, a property in Normandy, converted stables or a parent's house.

But yesterday the Clerk of the Parliaments Michael Pownall, a senior civil servant who has been asked to investigate, revealed an extraordinary loophole that suggests they will all get off the hook.

He said there was no definition of 'main address' in any of the guidance given to peers as he gave his first judgement in the case of former Liberal Democrat chief executive Lord Rennard.

The peer had been investigated over accusations that he claimed £41,000 for overnight stays in London to attend Parliament when he owns a house just two miles from Westminster.

Lord Rennard announced in May that he was stepping down as the Lib Dems' elections supremo, following allegations that he spent little time at the flat in Eastbourne, East Sussex, designated as his main address.

Mr Pownall said that he had accepted Lord Rennard's assurances that he did stay in Eastsaidbourne when Parliament was not sitting. But crucially, he added: 'In the absence of any definition of 'main address' in the current guidance to the House of Lords' Members Expenses Scheme, I have come to the conclusion that I should not uphold the complaint.'


By contrast, Commons guidelines make clear that MPs' 'main home' should be where they spend most of their time if they want to charge the taxpayer for the upkeep of another property.

Critics said the ruling meant peers were being allowed to designate anywhere they liked as their main home, regardless of how much time they spent there.

Peers whose claims have attracted controversy include Baroness Uddin, who has been accused of nominating an empty flat in Maidstone as her main home so she could claim for accommodation in London.

Lord Clarke of Hampstead is said to have admitted claiming for nights spent in London when he had returned to his home outside the capital.

Labour MP John Mann said the ruling in Lord Rennard's case set an alarming precedent.

'Who do these people think they are? This makes a mockery of standards in public life,' he

'There should be a full audit of their accounts in the same way as is being done in the House of Commons.'

Source: ' Daily Mail '

View All Nonsense News