5. Letter to the Commissioner from Mr
Anthony Steen
You wrote to me on the 3 August, regarding a complaint
by a Mr C J Clayton, in which he alleges I have improperly used
my Incidental Expenses Provision to produce and circulate my newspaper
reporting on my work in Parliament and the constituency.
I totally refute Mr Clayton's allegation. I have
never used the Incidental Expenses Provision or any public funds
improperly, nor have I used any such sums for campaigning on behalf
of a political party or otherwise. I strenuously deny that improper
use has been made.
His complaint relates to the statement on page 1
of my newspaper about the Lib Dems £100 cash back claim.
The overwhelming view of the House when Local Income Tax was debated
on the 19 July in the Chamber, was the Lib Dem scheme was both
unworkable and a gimmick, and that the Lib Dem Local Income Tax
was no answer to the problems of high Council Tax bills.
Furthermore, you should know the cost of the printing
Westminster Report claimed by me from the IEP was £3,060.30,
copy enclosed, against a total overall cost of printing and distribution
of £7,516.22. From this, you will note that nearly 60 per
cent of the costs of printing and distributing was met from sources
other than public funds.
In the past I have sent copies of Westminster Report
to the Fees Office, who have judged whether they can pay the entire
costs claimed or a percentage, if they concluded there was any
party-political or campaigning activity. In this case, they paid
the bill of £3,060.30 without question. It is against this
background that I would submit there is no case to answer, both
as to substance and detail.
15 September 2004
| 
