Appendix 2: Letter to the Clerk of the
Committee from Mr Tony McNulty, 19 October 2009
I refer to your letter of the 15th October
and the copy of the memorandum from the Parliamentary Commissioner
for Standards. Thank you for the opportunity to submit a short
note of written evidence for the consideration of the Committee.
I welcome the Commissioner's acceptance that I was
within the rules in establishing a second home in my constituency
and claiming against parliamentary allowances for this home (paras.66,
67 & 93).
I welcome the Commissioner's agreement that my expenses
for the constituency home were necessarily incurred, except for
the over-claims on mortgage interest and council tax (paras. 71
& 73) which I identified back in April/May 2009 and repaid
immediately. I would take this opportunity to apologise wholeheartedly
to the Committee for these errors.
I note that the Commissioner agrees that, generally,
I abated all costs other than mortgage interest and council tax
in recognition of my parents' presence in the home (para.75).
I also note his acceptance that the Department of Resources had
informed me in 1998-99, and relayed to him in July 2009, the same
advice, namely that mortgage interest was a fixed cost and should
not form part of any abatement (paras. 75 & 85). I am reassured
that the Commissioner acknowledges that this "needs to be
given some weight in considering Mr.McNulty's action in this case."
(para. 85)
I accept the Department of Resources view, set out
in July 2009, that the only other way that I could have abated
my claims was in terms of the 25% single person discount on the
council tax and by not claiming for bills, repairs and maintenance
(WE18). I note that the Commissioner concludes that my "claims
for utilities and other bills over that period appears reasonable."(para.
72)
I further accept, as I said in my interview with
the Commissioner (WE25, p.59), that a more formal arrangement
reflecting the costs of my parents use of the house would have
been wise to avoid, as the Commissioner points out, the possibility
of an 'accusation' of receiving benefit (paras. 79, 82 & 87),
but I was also very clear about the arrangement and my abatement,
generally, of all remaining costs other than mortgage interest
and council tax. I believe that my actions achieved the same ends
as a formal agreement and the imposition of a notional or actual
market rent. Had I imposed some notional or actual market rent,
it would have probably matched the value of my abatements and
I would possibly have claimed more in bills and utilities as a
consequence of rent being paid (para. 90).
I am grateful that the Commissioner recognises that
his conclusion on mortgage interest is "at odds with the
advice that I have received from the Department of Resources"
(para.84). I sought advice in 1998/99 and sincerely acted within
that advice. The same clear advice has again been given to the
Commissioner in July 2009 - that mortgage interest is a fixed
cost regardless of occupancy. The Commissioner recognises that
had I sought further advice from the Department of Resources -
they would not have advised against my arrangements (para.85).
I am clear that I complied with this advice and the rules that
pertained at the time and that have been re-iterated by the Department
of Resources as recently as July 2009.
I am grateful to the Commissioner for his recognition
that my claims were always significantly below the maximum allowed
under the ACA and that I have been open and full in my assistance
with this enquiry. I am also appreciative of his use of the word
'mistake' in para.92. However as I followed the consistent advice
from the Department of Resources I respectfully suggest it was
not a mistake and that I abated costs as fully as I considered
appropriate to keep within the letter and spirit of the rules
and this consistent advice.
In conclusion :-
1. I am grateful that the Commissioner has recognised
I was within the rules in establishing and claiming against parliamentary
allowances for my constituency home;
2. I welcome the Commissioner's acceptance that my
expenses for the constituency home were necessarily incurred except
for the careless errors at 5). below;
3. The Committee will note that at all times I have
acted within the rules and advice given by the Department of
Resources in 1998/99 and re-iterated to the Commissioner in
the letter of July 2009 (WE18) ;
4. I have abated all costs other than mortgage interest
and council tax in recognition of my parents occupancy of my second
home and to offset their living costs, but I accept that I could
have gone further in terms of the 25% single person discount on
the council tax, as suggested by the Department of Resources ;
5. I accept that I made careless mistakes with claims
on both council tax and mortgage interest, repaid as soon as I
identified them myself in April/May 2009 and for which I apologise
wholeheartedly;
6. I regret that I did not recognise that a more
formal agreement would have been wise and preferable to my arrangements
so as to avoid the risk of an 'accusation' of benefit, but I
firmly believe that this would not have saved public money as
I abated as fully as I thought appropriate, albeit informally
;
7. I believe that it is neither fair nor reasonable
to conclude as the Commissioner has done, given that this conclusion
rests on a significant reinterpretation of the rules that the
Department of Resources confirmed in July 2009 - just three months
ago. I sought to abate all claims other than council tax and mortgage
interest as much as I considered appropriate, in line with the
advice rendered and in recognition of the position of my parents,
probity and the efficient use of public funds - and did so throughout
the period concerned.
As the only substantive breach of the rules cited
by the Commissioner relies on a complete redefinition of the accepted
advice of the Department of Resources relayed as recently as July
2009, I would respectfully ask the Committee to judge me against
this advice and not on the Commissioner's redefinition. I have,
at all times, acted within the spirit and letter of that advice
and the rules more generally, notwithstanding my point about the
possibility of further abatement around the 25% single person
discount on council tax.
If the re-interpretation of the advice from the Department
of Resources is set aside, closer reading of the report leads
me to believe that even the Commissioner would have agreed that
I acted within the letter and spirit of the current rules and
I would ask the Committee to judge me on that basis.
I thank the Committee for the opportunity to comment
on the Commissioner's memorandum and would like to thank the Commissioner
for his diligence and courtesy throughout the investigation process.
| 
