26. Letter to Neighbour 3 (constituency)
from the Commissioner, 2 February 2010
Thank you for your letter about Ms Nadine Dorries
MP, which I received on 25 January.
I was grateful to you for providing this witness
information. I attach a note which sets out the procedure I follow
in taking evidence from witnesses. As you will see, since I am
undertaking an inquiry, I would ask that the evidence you have
sent me and our subsequent correspondence is not disclosed more
widely. My inquiries are subject to parliamentary privilege and
any evidence provided should, therefore, be treated as private
and confidential to the inquiry. Once my inquiry is completed,
your letter may be published along with the other evidence I have
received in the course of this inquiry.
In essence, the complaint into which I am inquiring
is that Ms Dorries wrongly identified her main home as her designated
second home for the purposes of her claims against the Additional
Costs Allowance.
The rules of the House of Commons as they were at
the time provided that a Member of Parliament's main home was
normally one where they spent more nights than any other. From
your letter, I understand that in 2009 you saw Ms Dorries about
twenty times in your street, where you are immediate neighbours.
I would be grateful if you could provide me with a little more
information about Ms Dorries' pattern of stays. If you can reliably
provide it, it would be helpful to have your estimate of the number
of nights which Ms Dorries has spent at the property, ideally
by financial year. Any other points you may wish to make to help
me with this inquiry would be very welcome.
It would be very helpful if you could let me have
a response to this letter within the next two weeks. I am likely
then to need to show it to Ms Dorries and give her an opportunity
to respond.
Thank you for your help with this matter.
2 February 2010
| 
