FINDINGS
OF FACT
SECOND HOME
137. When Ms Smith entered Parliament in 1997
she already owned a home in Redditch with her husband. She subsequently
moved home in Redditch twice, in May 1998 and in May 2004. Her
husband and two children are based in Redditch. Her current constituency
home is a four bedroom detached house bought for £295,000,
on which she and her husband have a joint mortgage.
138. When Ms Smith entered Parliament she also
established a London home, which—apart from a period between
1998 and 2001—has been shared with her sister. (During the
first part of this period she was effectively on maternity leave,
and then she moved to a flat on her own because her sister had
moved to a job that meant she lived outside London.)
139. The location of Ms Smith's London home has
changed on a number of occasions: in 1997 it was a house which
she rented jointly with her sister; at some point in 1998 she
moved to a flat on her own; in 2001 she and her sister moved
to a different address, and they moved again to her current London
home in April 2008. In March 2009 Ms Smith sent to the Department
of Resources a backdated notification of this change of address.
140. Ms Smith's current London home is a three
bedroom house in South London which she shares with her sister
and her sister's partner. The house was bought for £450,000.
Her sister has a mortgage on the home and Ms Smith guarantees
the mortgage. Ms Smith also pays £700 per month in rent and
contributes £150 a month towards food. She has bought furniture,
fixtures and fittings and has contributed to other maintenance
costs. Her sister pays the council tax.
141. Members whose constituencies are outside
London have (since 1971) been able to claim against the Additional
Costs Allowance for the costs of overnight stays in a second home
in their constituency or in London, their choice being restricted
by the location of their main home. From 1997 to 1999, when she
first became a Minister, Ms Smith identified her home in her constituency
as her main home. At the time she became a Minister, all Ministers
were deemed to have their main homes in London for ACA purposes.
Ms Smith accordingly changed the nomination of her main home to
London, and claimed against the Additional Costs Allowance for
the cost of her overnight stays in the constituency.
142. In early 2004, the Head of the Fees Office
wrote to all Ministers to let them know that the rule which deemed
that their London home was their main home for ACA purposes was
to end. This ministerial requirement was taken out of the next
edition of the Green Book in April 2005. Ms Smith left in place
the designation of her residence in London as her main home.
Accordingly, from 2001 Ms Smith has designated her main home as
being a house she shares with her sister and currently her sister's
partner in London.
143. Ms Smith's claims against the Additional
Costs Allowance for her Redditch home were £22,110 in 2006-07;
£22,948 in 2007-08 and £19,182 in 2008-09. She has claimed
in the categories of mortgage interest, utility bills, council
tax, telephone, servicing and maintenance, repairs and cleaning.
144. Ms Smith entered the Cabinet in May 2006
and on 28 June 2007 she became Home Secretary. In June 2007 Ms
Smith sought advice from the Fees Office about whether her family
home should automatically be her main home for the purposes of
the Additional Costs Allowance. On the basis of the information
she provided, she was advised that the location of a Member's
main home might not always be where their family resided, and
that it was reasonable for her to continue to claim the allowance
against her Redditch home given her ministerial responsibilities
required her to spend the majority of her time in Westminster.
145. There are some differences of view between
the witnesses as to the number of nights Ms Smith has spent in
her London home since moving there in April 2008. Ms Smith's evidence
is that she is present at her London address for the bulk of the
week and that over the 2008 summer recess and the 2008 Christmas
holiday period she spent a significant proportion of her time
there. This is supported by her sister and her next-door neighbour.
On the other hand, the complainant—who lives slightly further
down the road—believes, on the basis of her recollection
of the visible police presence in the road, that Ms Smith stays
at her London address on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday nights
whilst Parliament is in session, and does not reside at the property
for months and weeks during the summer, at Christmas or at other
times when Parliament is in recess.
146. Ms Smith believes that the best evidence
of her overnight stays is derived from her ministerial diaries,
supported by her personal recollections. The resultant figures,
which take some account of the police evidence, are as follows:
| FINANCIAL YEAR
| NIGHTS SPENT IN LONDON
| NIGHTS SPENT IN CONSTITUENCY
| DIFFERENCE
|
| 2005-06 (from 11 May 2005)
| 139 | 128
| 11 |
| 2006-07
| 151 | 131
| 20 |
| 2007-08
| 152 | 151
| 1 |
| 2008-09
| 143 | 161
| -18 |
The police figures, taken with the diary estimates
up to 27 June 2007, would suggest a difference of -12 nights in
2007-08 and -37 nights in 2008-09.
147. The Director of Operations in the Department
of Resources has confirmed that the cost of Ms Smith accommodating
her family in her second home was, in the Department's view, acceptable
under the rules. But it was open to Ms Smith to nominate her constituency
home as her main home if the overall facts justified it. He has
pointed out that while paragraph 3.11.1 of the Green Book sets
out the presumption that a main home is where a Member spends
more nights than any other, this is qualified by the word "normally"
and Members are invited to consult the Department if in doubt.
148. Ms Smith's view is that she made the best
judgement she could: that she was likely to be spending more nights
in London than in Redditch; that she had explicitly separated
her family life in Redditch from her work life in London; that
London was where she spent most of her time on her parliamentary
and ministerial duties; that she would have been wrong to change
the designation of her main home at any time from 1999, when she
became a Minister, because nothing had qualitatively changed in
her circumstances; and that it would have been more difficult
to justify having her homes the other way around.
MEDIA PACKAGE
149. In the course of the financial year 2008-09,
Ms Jacqui Smith made claims against the Additional Cost Allowance
for a total of 8 monthly payments for a Virgin Media broadband
package supplied to her Redditch address. The basic package consisted
of telephone line rental, and television and broadband services.
In addition to the cost of the basic package, each of the claims
also included charges for additional entertainment elements, including
films and sport. The first such claim was submitted in May 2008
and included advance charges for April-May 2008. The last such
claim was submitted in March 2009, and the last bill claimed for
was dated 30 December 2008. Each claim was supported by a summary
bill, except for the claim submitted on 4 June 2008, which was
supported by an itemised bill, which included a detailed list
of charges and which separately identified the costs of the basic
package and of the additional entertainment elements. The claims
covered eight months within the period from April 2008 to January
2009. There is no claim recorded for the months of June or November
2008. The total sum claimed by Ms Smith in respect of this package
amounted to £553.20, of which some £185.20 was attributable
to charges for the additional entertainment elements. All these
claims were met. The Department of Resources did not identify
the mistaken claim for film items in the claim submitted on 4
June 2008.
150. The summary page of the bill submitted in
support of the 4 June 2008 claim was re-submitted with the following
two claims for September and October. The supporting documents
subsequently requested by the Department of Finance and Administration
in November 2008 were not supplied, since Ms Smith took the request
to be in respect of future claims.
151. The view of the Department of Resources
is that Members may claim against the Additional Costs Allowance
only for a basic subscription to digital suppliers, and that claims
in respect of any additional services would not normally be appropriate.
In its view, Ms Smith's basic Virgin Media package of telephone
line rental, broadband connection and television services would
be an acceptable claim against the Allowance. The Department takes
the view that the additional cost of 'on demand' films, as included
on the bill submitted in support of Ms Smith's Additional Costs
Allowance claim submitted on 4 June, is not eligible expenditure
against the Allowance.
152. Ms Smith fully accepts that claims for entertainment
are not allowed against the Additional Costs Allowance, has taken
full responsibility for her mistake, and has apologised on several
occasions for the fact that she wrongly claimed for the additional
entertainment elements. On 28 March 2009, she repaid to the Department
of Resources on her own initiative the sum of £400. This
payment was made in recognition of her desire to repay her claims
in respect of all television services supplied to her Redditch
address through the Virgin Media package, namely, both the additional
entertainment elements which she accepted should not have been
claimed, and also the television element of the basic package,
leaving the Additional Costs Allowance to meet the cost of only
the most basic broadband and telephone package available.
| 
