United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal

Headed by former civil servant Sir Thomas Legg, the panel published its findings on 12 October as MPs returned to Westminster following the summer recess.

In the United Kingdom, MPs can claim expenses, including the cost of accommodation, 'wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred for the performance of a Member's parliamentary duties'.

[77] Former SAS officer Major John Wick, the owner of a London-based risk management company[78][79] has been named as the middle-man for an unnamed whistleblower; he has spoken of the need to bring the information he had been given into the public domain.

[80] Wick stated that: The person on the end of the line told me he had a hard drive which contained details of every MP's expense claims over the past four years.

Robert Winnett's team of lobby journalists, Whitehall editors, reporters, and social affairs correspondents, initially composed of Martin Beckford, Christopher Hope, Rosa Prince, Jon Swaine, and Holly Watt.

[82][83] In May 2009, major national newspapers such as The Times described the resulting controversy as "Parliament's darkest day"[84] and a "full blown political crisis",[85] reporting upon cross-party firings and resignations, an exodus of shamed MPs,[84] the prospect of criminal[86] and tax evasion[87][88][89] charges, and a motion of no confidence being prepared against the Speaker.

[90] Public interest in the expenses debate led to the 14 May 2009 edition of the BBC political and current affairs television programme Question Time recording its highest viewing figures in its 30-year run, of 3.8 million, with audience members heckling guest panellist Margaret Beckett.

Nadine Dorries, a Conservative MP, criticised the Telegraph's handling, which she described as "picking off a few MPs each day, emailing at noon, giving five hours to reply, recording the conversation, not allowing them to speak, telling them they are going to publish anyway".

(See also Effect on MPs and on the political structure below) A widespread public reaction was heightened as a result of several factors: the incident broke in the face of an economic recession and financial crisis, under an already unpopular government,[92][93] only weeks before the 2009 European Parliament elections.

The resignation of Michael Martin, Speaker of the House of Commons, followed after he was pressured to step down for approving the allowances system that MPs have manipulated with questionable claims of expenses.

Martin then concluded his part in the debate over how to handle the expense scandal, by announcing that the Commons clerk had referred the matter of the leaked information to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner.

Overall, Martin appeared to be more concerned with the nature of the leak of the information, which led to the Telegraph's publishing details of MPs' expenses and allowances, rather than offering an anticipated apology or explanation.

That will remain a matter for the Senior Salaries Review Body which annually informs the Speaker of the House of Commons of the percentage increase to be awarded to MPs.

Former Member of Parliament Paul Flynn recalled his experiences with IPSA upon its creation: "A monthly thirty-minute chore was complicated by ISPA into endless hours of tedious frustrating trawling through a bureaucratic morass of irrational rules" and he believed, "A simple five-part claims system was atomised into a hundred headings and sub-headings".

[163] In various cases these candidates stood in recognition of the loss of public goodwill suffered by established MPs and parties, and proposed to stand on "clean slate" or anti-sleaze platforms.

[167] The comment led to a forceful rebuke by Conservative leader David Cameron, who stated that the anger and mood were warranted and that MPs should be more concerned about what the public were thinking.

[168][169] On 23 May 2009 the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams warned about the potential effect of the controversy on the democratic process, and that "the continuing systematic humiliation of politicians itself threatens to carry a heavy price in terms of our ability to salvage some confidence in our democracy.

"[170] On the same day writing in The Times, columnist and former MP Matthew Parris reflected that "extravagance, genuine mistake, sly acquisitiveness and outright criminal fraud are now jumbled together in the national mind as though there were no moral differences".

[171] On 11 June 2009 ex-communities secretary Hazel Blears, who chose to resign from the government just before the English county council and European elections, said that she regretted the timing of her decision.

On 25 May 2009, Health Secretary Alan Johnson (seen as a possible candidate for Labour leadership) stated that one response to the controversy should be a full review of the electoral and political system.

Writing in The Guardian on 27 May 2009, Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg suggested cancelling MPs holidays until 'the constitutional crisis sparked by the row over expenses is resolved'.

[180] Keir Starmer, Director of Public Prosecutions for England and Wales announced on 5 February 2010 that three Labour MPs, Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine, and Conservative peer Lord Hanningfield would face criminal charges of false accounting in relation to their expense claims.

[155][181] David Chaytor (Labour) appealed along with Jim Devine and Elliot Morley to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom that his actions were protected by parliamentary privilege.

[134] Eric Illsley (Labour) pleaded guilty to charges of false accounting totalling £14,000 and was sentenced at Southwark Crown Court to 12 months imprisonment.

[184] Denis MacShane (Labour) was jailed for six months on 23 December 2013 for expenses fraud, after admitting submitting 19 fake receipts amounting to £12,900, making him the fifth MP to get a prison sentence as a result of the scandal.

[190] In December, she was sentenced to a two-year supervision and treatment order, the judge commenting that although some might feel she had "got away with it", the court had acted "in accordance with the law of the land and on the basis of the evidence that it hears".

[200] An independent panel chaired by former civil servant Sir Thomas Legg was established following the row, with a remit to examine all claims relating to the second homes allowance between 2004 and 2008.

[201] The panel published its findings on 12 October as MPs returned to Westminster following the summer recess, with each MP receiving a letter in which they were informed whether or not they would be required to repay any expenses they had claimed.

[202] MPs from all main political parties expressed their anger at Legg's decision to retroactively enforce the rules, meaning some payouts already allowed were now treated as violations.

[207] In May 2010 it was reported in The Daily Telegraph that a number of MPs and their staff have been caught attempting to edit their personal Wikipedia pages to remove references to their expenses claims.