10. LETTER
TO
THE
COMMISSIONER
FROM
RT
HON
JACQUI
SMITH
MP, 26 MARCH
2009
I am pleased to provide you with the information
you request about the number of nights I have spent in London
and in Redditch on the basis of each of the last financial years.
My best estimate, having referred to both ministerial and personal
diaries and according to my own recollection, is as follows.
2005/06 (STARTING
AFTER THE
GENERAL ELECTIONMAY
10TH 2005MARCH
31ST 2006)
142 nights in London
130 nights in Redditch
55 nights on ministerial or personal trips
2006/07
150 nights in London
133 nights in Redditch
82 nights on ministerial or personal trips
2007/08
157 nights in London
147 nights in Redditch
62 nights on ministerial or personal trips
2008/09 (INCLUDES
PROJECTIONS TO
THE END
OF MARCH
2009)
146 nights in London
155 nights in Redditch
64 nights on ministerial or personal trips
In terms of the figures for the current financial
year (2008/09), you will note that had one more night per month
been spent in London rather than in Redditch the balance would
have been more than reversed.
On the basis of these figures, I maintain the position
I set out in my letter to you of 24 February that I made a wholly
reasonable judgement that I would spend more nights in London
than at any other property. I based that judgement on:
- Previous rules, in place until
February 2004, that assumed a Minister's main home would be in
London.
- My experience of previous financial years, in
which I spent more nights in London than in Redditch.
- My expectation, as Home Secretary, that I would
need to be in London with no warning and could therefore spend
more rather than less time in my London home.
My letter of 24 February also identified two important
factors in how my role as Home Secretary has affected the balance
of nights spent in London and in Redditch. The first is that I
have undertaken more Ministerial trips overseas. As these largely
take place during the working week, they will tend to reduce the
number of "London nights". The second is that there
are many times when I have departed very early from Redditch or
arrived very late in Redditch. These days have obviously been
spent in London, and had I not been able to depend on a ministerial
car in Redditch, I certainly would have spent these nights in
London as well.
You raise the issue of my police protection. I have
considered your request carefully, in view of the important issues
it raises for the relationship between protection officers and
the principals whom they protect, and in view of the potential
implications your request may have for others who are covered
by protection arrangements.
Given these wider implications for protection arrangements,
I sought advice from Sir David Normington, the Home Office Permanent
Secretary, on how to respond to your request. Having discussed
the matter with the Cabinet Office, Sir David's response is attached.
You will wish to judge whether to approach the Metropolitan Police
Service and, through them, the West Mercia Constabulary, along
the lines you propose.
Having no familiarity with the type of records which
may be held, however, I am not in a position to judge how accurate
they may be. As you will appreciate, accuracy in these matters
is of paramount importance to me.
My own view is that the most accurate records for
my movements are my Ministerial and personal diaries, supported
by my own personal recollection. In the instance of providing
access to a Home Secretary's Ministerial diarya document
maintained and owned by the Home OfficeI understand this
would be an unprecedented step, but I would be very happy to arrange
an opportunity for us to go through this and my other diaries
for the years in question.
You ask in your letter whether I consider my claims
under the Additional Cost Allowance criterion are justified given
that I already owned a home in Redditch. My interpretation of
this condition has always been that the "additional"
element related to additional costs involved in having to have
two homes in order to carry out both parliamentary and constituency
duties. I have never interpreted "additional" as being
about whether a particular home was added after election to Parliament.
When I was elected to Parliament I needed to have
a residence in London toothe distance for commuting is
too great. There was a genuine need for an additional residence
and the nomination for which was to be my main residence only
changed when I became a Minister in line with the rules at the
time.
However, the fact that I have maintained a home in
Redditchin addition to my home in Londonis of course
directly related to my role as a Member of Parliament. If I wasn't
an MP, I would only need one home and may well have sold my Redditch
home to move elsewhere. I, therefore, believe that the costs that
I have claimed for my Redditch home have been precisely to enable
me to stay overnight in my constituency.
I hope that you find this clarification and the new
figures helpful. Please do not hesitate to contact me again should
you require further information. As ever I am very keen for this
matter to be resolved as quickly as possible.
26 March 2009
|