Mr Devine was first reported to the police by the Sunlight Centre for Open Politics

Commenting today on the news Harry Cole from Sunlight said “this is a great day for transparency. Finally the message is getting through that law makers cannot be lawbreakers.”

Sir Christopher’s main reforms include;

• No mortgage interest on second homes. They will only be able to claim for rent or hotel stays. Existing mortgage arrangements to be valid for lifetime of next Parliament.
• New independent parliamentary regulator to review appropriate limit for monthly rental claims.
• Ban on MPs claiming for gardening and cleaning costs. Second home claims to be limited to basic claims such as utility, telephone and council tax bills.
• Flipping banned.  Any MP who makes capital gains on their property will have ro pay this back.
• Central agency to oversee new MPs’ accommodation needs in London, sourcing and handling payments on suitable properties.
• A ban on MPs employing family members on their payroll. Change to be phased in over five years.
• MPs within “reasonable commuting distance” of London will not be able to claim the new second homes allowance.
• Resettlement grants for MPs retiring voluntarily will be stopped from the general election after next.  Instead they will receive eight weeks pay to wind up their office.
• MPs defeated at an election or deselected will get a pay-off equivalent to nine months’ salary.
• All candidates to become MPs must declare all their external financial interests and second jobs.
• £10,000 a year communications allowance to be abolished.
• MPs working late in the Commons to be reimbursed for transport home or overnight stays in London.
• All expenses must be accompanied by receipts.
• Overnight £25 subsistence allowance to be paid for hotel stays only and upon supply of receipts.
• No MP should be allowed to sit both at Westminster and in a devolved Parliament from 2011 onwards.
• New parliamentary regulator to have powers to demand information from MPs and seek repayment of expenses.

It is estimated that MPs will lose up to £20,000 a year from their expenses if the reforms are implemented.

MPs who oppose reforms include Sir Stuart Bell who has said MPs should be paid £90,000, but this is so they do not need to pay any expenses at all.  Solicitor General Vera Baird said a pay rise would be a ‘necessary compensation’ for MPs.  Sir Stuart Bell sits on the Members Estimates Committee, which prevented public access to MPs expenses during the scandal, so he is hardly in a situation lobby for pay increases.

The Sunlight Centre believes that the only way forward is to show leadership on these issues and put the abuses of the expenses scandal behind MPs, no matter how uncomfortable financially they feel.  Indeed the Kelly Report has not set out to punish MPs instead it merely corrects a major systematic failure in the expenses system.  The expenses regime was set up to facilitate MPs at work not as a substitute for pay.  If MPs are unhappy with the amount they are being paid then perhaps they should either find another job or they have the option of in the Kelly Report of working a second job in parliament.

We believe this is the only way to restore respect and confidence in the British political system is to implement the Kelly Report.

Are the Kelly Report recommendations tough or weak?

The Sunlight Centre has broken down the potential reforms into four categories and 30 potential reforms to enable journalists to judge the toughness of the proposals. Score the report.

The check list was compiled by Juliet Samuel, the author of Disinfecting Parliament: The Shadow Kelly Report.

Sir Christopher Kelly publishes report today on MPs expenses.  Today.

Sunlight Correspondents are currently in Westminster including Juliet Samuel author of the shadow report ‘Disinfecting Parliament’ to measure the success of the Kelly report both with the media, the public and MPs (if anyone is brave enough to speak).

If you are member of the media please telephone 02078373312 to request a copy of the shadow report

More updates to follow on the Kelly Report throughout the day……

So far the current proposals from the report are:

• No mortgage interest on second homes. They will only be able to claim for rent or hotel stays. Existing mortgage arrangements to be valid for lifetime of next Parliament.
• New independent parliamentary regulator to review appropriate limit for monthly rental claims.
• Ban on MPs claiming for gardening and cleaning costs. Second home claims to be limited to basic claims such as utility, telephone and council tax bills.
• Flipping banned.  Any MP who makes capital gains on their property will have ro pay this back.
• Central agency to oversee new MPs’ accommodation needs in London, sourcing and handling payments on suitable properties.
• A ban on MPs employing family members on their payroll. Change to be phased in over five years.
• MPs within “reasonable commuting distance” of London will not be able to claim the new second homes allowance.
• Resettlement grants for MPs retiring voluntarily will be stopped from the general election after next.  Instead they will receive eight weeks pay to wind up their office.
• MPs defeated at an election or deselected will get a pay-off equivalent to nine months’ salary.
• All candidates to become MPs must declare all their external financial interests and second jobs.
• £10,000 a year communications allowance to be abolished.
• MPs working late in the Commons to be reimbursed for transport home or overnight stays in London.
• All expenses must be accompanied by receipts.
• Overnight £25 subsistence allowance to be paid for hotel stays only and upon supply of receipts.
• No MP should be allowed to sit both at Westminster and in a devolved Parliament from 2011 onwards.
• New parliamentary regulator to have powers to demand information from MPs and seek repayment of expenses.

We will be publishing Sunlight accounts on a monthly basis from now on.

The first accounts are listed below with links:

Sunlight Donations June – October 2009

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tsndzCw8i6bW5xQe3iJOTMg&output=html

Sunlight Profit and Loss to 1st November 2009

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tPocYiKDeFeZb-FKW6M2NTQ&output=html

Former Home Office minister Tony McNulty is ordered to repay almost £14,000 after claiming a second home allowance for his parents’ house.  The Commons standards and privileges committee ruled that Mr McNulty breached Commons rules by making a claim for expenses that were,

“not wholly and exclusively incurred in connection with his parliamentary duties”

“had the effect of subsidising the living costs of Mr McNulty’s parents from public funds,”

Mr McNulty claimed a total of £60,000 in expenses on the north west London house, which he owns, after moving to his new wife’s home when they married in 2002. He insisted he had not broken the rules, as he continued to use the house as a base when working in his Harrow constituency at weekends.

The row over expenses could spread to the House of Lords, when a report is published setting out reforms, following controversy over allowances and lobbying activities.

The Eames report wants to restore public confidence in the Lords, and will propose changes to their code of conduct, which requires peers to “act always on their personal honour”.

The Research Director for the Sunlight Centre Chris Galley in a live interview with Channel 4 News at Noon said that the rules for the House of Lords on expenses are “very vague”.

“I think there should be a complete overhaul of the Lords rule book,” he said. “There should be a complete overhaul of the expenses system in the House of Lords that would allow Lords to claim proper expenses”

While many family members work hard for Members, the abuse of this leniency has shown that a prohibition is necessary. A ban on politicians’ employment of relatives is already standard practice in the US and Germany and should become so here as well.

In order to combat the ban wives and husbands  of MPs, are making contingency plans in order to preserve their own skin.  This action is a co-ordinated swapping of jobs with one another.

Currently there are about 200 MPs who employ wives, husbands, children and other relations.  After the Derek Conway affair in 2008 the further employment of children was banned.

The relatives believe they have fallen victim to the Commons expenses scandal. Some are determined to defeat Kelly and have consulted lawyers, while others have referred their complaints to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, alleging discrimination.

“We have had the conversation about swapping jobs endlessly,” said Burt. “They are water-cooler conversations. It would be an option. We did work out a very complicated ‘giant wife swap’ where you all move one husband along. It would be an option.”

She said the Kelly proposals discriminated against hard-working employees. “We know there have been people who have done over the system, but there are not many. It would appear they are looking for scapegoats,” she said.

The row over spouses’ jobs comes as new figures obtained by The Sunday Times show that the total spent by MPs on their staff in 2008-9 went up more than 8% to £59.96m.  Jacqui Smith’s husband and parliamentary assistant Richard Timney currently earns between £27, 780 and £40,052.

Although Kelly’s ban would stop MPs’ relatives working for them, it would not prevent them finding employment with others at Westminster. The spouses are making their plans as Kelly consults lawyers about whether his ban would be legal under unemployment law. Some members of his committee are lobbying for current employees to be allowed to stay.

As stated on Question Time last week Sir Christopher Kelly will make his findings public next week and he has already stated that he finds the employment of family members ‘odd’.

Peers accused of abusing their expenses have been given the green light to carry on claiming.  They include peers who have been accused of raking in large sums from the taxpayer based on dubious claims about the location of their main address.

But now 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.  This is likely to be the same for other Peers who have been accused of similar offences as Lord Rennard.

Lord Rennard 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.

Below is the Sunlight Centre’s Press release which we sent out yesterday on the subject of Lord Rennard:

Lord Rennard Press Release 22-10

 While her apology was ordered by the Commons Standards and Privileges Committee, the seven-month investigation into her use of expenses began after a complaint from the pro-transparency group, the Sunlight Centre for Open Politics. It alleged that by wrongly listing her sister’s London property as her main home, she was able to claim £116,000 for her constituency home in Redditch. When the complaint was upheld, the centre’s director, one Chris Galley, was delighted.

He insists that the fact that he again finds himself pitted against Ms Smith is not the actions of an embittered former employee, but is purely a coincidence. "It just happens to be her," he said. "We will only go after MPs who we think have serious questions to answer."

Mr Galley is not letting Ms Smith off with an apology. The institute is now putting pressure on her to pay back more than £42,000 in expenses it says she claimed after 2007, when she began spending even more time in Redditch.

"It’s for things like patio heaters," Mr Galley said. And he has an even more ambitious plan to bring down his former boss – he is attempting to launch a private prosecution against her over her expenses claims.

"These things are always expensive, but hopefully we can get this to court," he said.

"If we can do that, I am quite happy that a jury would be convinced that there is a case to answer."

The stakes are high. If the case even makes it into the judicial system, it would be hugely embarrassing not only for Ms Smith, but for all MPs desperately hoping to move on from the expenses scandal.

"We are hoping to use this as a test case that others will be able to use against more MPs in the future… who are guilty of acting unscrupulously," Mr Galley said. He has raised about £15,000 for the "Bring Jacqui to Justice" campaign, but needs around £100,000 to proceed with the prosecution.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-whitehall-mole-revelling-in-jacqui-smiths-discomfort-1803640.html