The BBC has the story of how Lib Dem MP Jeremy Browne has won his appeal against repaying £18,000 of expenses.
Share:Taunton MP Jeremy Browne complained after auditor Sir Thomas Legg ruled he must repay the cash claimed for mortgage interest on his second home.
Sir Paul Kennedy, who was appointed to hear appeals, said he had acted “openly and honestly” when making his claim.
Mr Browne said he felt “relieved” and “vindicated”, but “not elated”.
He is the first of the 80 MPs who challenged Sir Thomas’s requests to repay money to make the results of his appeal public.
Labour’s Frank Cook, Frank Field and Patrick Hall and Tory Bernard Jenkin are also among those known to have appealed since the orders were made in October.
One Comment
This ruling apparently means that MPs are to be allowed to secure additional mortgage loans on their second homes – the interest of which will be paid by the taxpayer – for purposes quite unconnected with their second homes. In this case, for the payment of the deposit on the supposed main home.
I can understand that the job requires MPs to work in two different geographical areas, so that it’s reasonable for the state to finance an additional residence. But I cannot understand why the state should be expected to finance _more_ than one residence. Ordinary people have to pay their accommodation costs out of their salaries. Why not MPs – who have salaries considerably higher than the average?
One Trackback
[...] Last week it was Lib Dem MP Jeremy Browne has won his appeal against repaying £18,000 of expenses. Now fellow Lib Dem Lembit Opik has also had his appeal against repaying hundreds of pounds in parliamentary expenses allowed by Sir Paul Kennedy, the judge brought in to arbitrate on disputed claims. The BBC reports: Montgomeryshire MP Lembit Opik was ordered to pay back £900 he claimed for a mobile phone bill. Sir Thomas Legg, the retired civil servant auditing MPs’ expenses, said the Liberal Democrat MP should not have been able to claim for the phone bill. But Mr Opik won an appeal against the ruling. [...]