56. Letter to the Commissioner from
Rt Hon Andrew Mackay, 12 September 2010
Thank you for your response of 8th September with
enclosures. I am not quite clear if the transcript dated 29th
of August is [the then Head of the Fees Office's] full response.
If not and you believe it to be relevant I would appreciate seeing
the remainder.
I am heartened that [the Director of Strategic Projects]
has again confirmed it was reasonable for us to infer that his
Department had no difficulty with our arrangements. I accept his
advice that it only became a requirement to put the second home
address on claim forms from 2003. However, like him, I do not
believe this fundamentally changes the position. I assume I had
in my mind this went back to 1997 because we had at that time
designated in writing our main and second homes which was then
repeated periodically at the Fees Office's request. I also recall
us both submitting both mortgage interest details and council
tax demands prior to 2003 even though this was not then a Green
Book requirement.
I am pleased you believe your inquiry is near conclusion
and can shortly be submitted to the Standards and Privileges Committee
as we would appreciate this matter being resolved. In conclusion
I would rest my case on the following points:-
- Notwithstanding [the then Head
of the Fees Office's] responses, I am very clear that he did advise
me that my wife and I should declare different second homes. I
believe my immediate reaction in May 2009 to contact him for confirmation
adds considerable weight to the sincerity of my belief.
- As [the Director of Strategic Projects] has twice
testified, I assumed that as the Fees Office were fully informed
of our main and second home arrangements—but never queried
or challenged them—they must have been acceptable.
- In addition I did, of course, satisfy myself
that these arrangements met with the criteria for claiming second
homes set out in the Green Book.
- Finally you have on a number of occasions asked
whether I felt my arrangements met with the "spirit"
of the rules as they were meant to be applied. I did consider
this matter and believed that as two Prime Ministers, the then
Speaker of the House and a number of other MPs, claimed ACA on
the only property they owned and maintained at their own expense—whilst
having access to another property elsewhere—it was therefore
an acceptable arrangement for the House Authorities.
Please let me know if I can be of further help.
12 September 2010
|
