Wrong Harriet, wrong

The BBC loyally report the latest bleatings of Harriet Harman, as she tries to curry favour with MPs ahead of a Labour leadership election. Harriet Harman is reported as saying that Sir Thomas Legg's review of MPs' expenses must be based on the "rules and standards that obtained at the time".... "To do anything else would be arbitrary,". The fact is that the Green Book made it perfectly clear what could be claimed and once again I will repeat what I have said before:

"From The Green Book:

"Claims must only be made for expenditure that it was necessary for a Member to incur to ensure that he or she could properly perform his or her parliamentary duties."

"Claims should be above reproach and must reflect actual usage of the resources being claimed."


"Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else."


"Members are committed to openness about what expenditure has been incurred and for what purposes."


"Individual Members take personal responsibility for all expenses incurred, for making claims and for keeping records, even if the administration of claims is delegated by them to others."

From "The Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament":

"Holders of public office should take decisions solely in terms of the public interest. They should not do so in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends."


"Members shall at all times ensure that their use of expenses, allowances, facilities and services provided from the public purse is strictly in accordance with the rules laid down on these matters, and that they observe any limits placed by the House on the use of such expenses, allowances, facilities and services."

If that is not clear enough for Harriet Harman, her fellow troughers and the BBC how about this from May. It's further extracts from the Green Book with my comments:

"1.3 Fundamental principles

In July 1995, the House agreed to adopt the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament – this can be found on the internet here – which includes a number of general principles of personal conduct. These are based on concepts of selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership.
The broad principles set out below are derived from the Code of Conduct and underpin the allowance regime. When making claims against parliamentary allowances, Members must adhere to these principles.
The principles are:
Claims should be above reproach and must reflect actual usage of the resources being claimed.

Claims must only be made for expenditure that it was necessary for a Member to incur to ensure that he or she could properly perform his or her parliamentary duties.
Bar-B-Qs, David Miliband's pot plants, Gordon Brown's Sky subsciptions etc.


Allowances are reimbursed only for the purpose of a Member carrying out his or her parliamentary duties. Claims cannot relate to party political activity of any sort, nor must any claim provide a benefit to a party political organisation.


It is not permissible for a Member to claim under any parliamentary allowance for anything that the Member is claiming from any other source.


Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else.
Quoting from The Telegraph: "Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, changed his official “second home” designation four times in four years. Geoff Hoon, the Transport Secretary, also switched his second home, which allowed him to improve extensively his family home in Derbyshire before buying a London town house also funded by the taxpayer. Andy Burnham, the Culture Secretary, Caroline Flint, the Minister for Europe, and Paul Murphy, the Welsh Secretary, also bought flats — or the freehold on a property they already owned — and claimed stamp duty and other moving costs. Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, claimed thousands of pounds to improve his constituency home after he had announced his resignation as an MP. He sold the property for a profit of £136,000." Well to my eye these "give rise to, or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else"


Members are committed to openness about what expenditure has been incurred and for what purposes.
The actions taken by Speaker Martin, Gordon Brown and others in trying to restrict what information is to be made public and then today in getting the Police involved in looking for the leaker rather than investigating the possible frauds seems to go against the principle of "openness".


Individual Members take personal responsibility for all expenses incurred, for making claims and for keeping records, even if the administration of claims is delegated by them to others.
So excuses about mistakes being made by clerical staff are not allowable excuses, bear that in mind when listening to the squirming Members.


The requirement of ensuring value for money is central in claiming for accommodation, goods or services – Members should avoid purchases which could be seen as extravagant or luxurious.
New heating systems because the water is too hot, multiple flat screen TVs in one house, etc. etc. etc.


Claims must be supported by documentary evidence, except where the House has agreed that such evidence is not necessary.
All claims for just under the £250 disclosure limit should be considered suspect."