Written evidence received by the Parliamentary
Commissioner for Standards
1. Letter
to the Commissioner from Mr Michael Barnbrook, 29 June 2009
I wish to register a formal complaint against Mr
Denis MacShane, MP.
The complaint relates to an article in the Mail
on Sunday, dated 28th June, 2009, headed "Denis
MacShane claims for 8 laptops in 3 years",
a copy of which I enclose.[254]
In the article it states that Mr MacShane used his
office expenses to claim more than £5,900 for 8 machines
between March 2005 and January last year.
The computers, which cost between £498 and £1276
each, are in addition to technical equipment provided to MPs by
Parliamentary authorities.
The Mail on Sunday claims that four laptops
were claimed in 2007-08the last year for which records
are availableincluding what appears to be a duplicate claim
in successive months for a computer of the same value, £498.
The Mail on Sunday also claims that Mr MacShane
claimed more than £8,000 for translation services.
Apparently, he submitted more than a dozen invoices
to the Commons fees office bearing the heading of the European
Policy Institute. Each bill was justified by one line"research
and translation" followed
by a demand for fees ranging between £550 and £950.
The European Policy Institute, which according to
the Mail on Sunday has a ghost presence on the Internet, is controlled
by Mr MacShane's brother,[name].
Finally, Mr MacShane has claimed expenses of nearly
£20,000 a year for seven years in order to run his official
constituency office from a shabby looking garage at his home address.
If the allegations made in the Mail on Sunday
are true, Mr MacShane appears to be in breach of parliamentary
rules.
I am requesting that you use your powers under Standing
Order 149 to demand from Mr MacShane all telephone, broadband
and other records, in order to satisfy the taxpayer that the £20,000
a year to run his constituency office is properly accounted for.
I am also requesting that you use your powers under
Standing Order 149 to obtain evidence of documents that have been
translated and research undertaken for Mr MacShane by the European
Policy Institute in order to satisfy the taxpayer that the charges
were justified.
The Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament clearly
states that holders of public office should take decisions solely
in the terms of the public interest. They should not do so in
order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves,
their families and their friends.
The Code also states that no improper use shall be
made of any payment or allowance made to Ministers for public
purposes and the administrative rules which apply to such payments
and allowances must be strictly observed.
I have not submitted any evidence with my complaint
as it is already in the public domain and I am not aware that
Mr MacShane is denying any of the allegations made against him
by the Mail on Sunday.
It goes without saying that, if during the course
of any investigation, you become aware of possible criminal wrongdoing
by Mr MacShane, you pass the matter to the Metropolitan Police
for investigation, in accordance with the Eighth Report of the
Committee on Standards and Privileges, 2007-08.[255]
Thank you for your attention to this matter.[256]
29 June 2009
2. Enclosure
to Mr Michael Barnbrook's letter of 29 June 2009: Article from
Mail on Sunday, 28 June 2009
Labour MP Denis MacShane claims expenses
for eight laptops... in just three years
Labour MP Denis MacShane is facing further questions
over his expenses after it was revealed that he claimed for eight
laptop computers in just three years.
According to Commons files, the controversial former
Europe Minister used his office expenses to claim more than £5,900
for the machines between March 2005 and January last year.
The computers, which cost between £498 and £1,276
each, are in addition to technical equipment provided to MPs by
Parliamentary authorities.
Mysteriously, a recent visitor to MacShane's Rotherham
constituency office, said he could see only one computer, a desktop
model, in the study. Four laptops were claimed in 2007-08the
last year for which records are availableincluding what
appears to be a duplicate claim in successive months for a computer
of the same value, £498.95.
During the three-year period, Mr MacShane also claimed
for a £212 Palm Pilot and three digital cameras worth up
to £300 each. Five of the laptops were claimed for in November,
December or January, and two of the receipts come from a Dixons
tax-free airport store.
Last night Mr MacShane, who last week faced questions
over more than £8,000 charged to the taxpayer for "translation
services" carried out by a think-tank
run by his [...] brother, failed to respond to repeated requests
from The Mail on Sunday for a reaction.
But in a statement released to his local paper he
claimed that the nature of his duties and the march of technological
change necessitated the purchases.
"I did not come into politics
to manage budgets, supplies, staffing etc, and I am the first
to acknowledge this has not had the important and detailed attention
which with hindsight I now realise I should have provided,"
he said.
"I spend a lot of time
travelling and am on the road a lot, so like others in similar
roles, computers, mobile phones and BlackBerrys are an absolute
necessity and are in constant use seven days a week.
"In both my offices I employ
permanent and part-time staff. Since 1994, I have always had one
full-time constituency assistant in Rotherham as well as other
part-time employees.
"I also have interns and
researchers in my offices, and most of the equipment purchased
has been for their use and to ensure I have fully functioning
offices.
"Camera, computer and phone
technology is ever-changing and I have sought to use the annual
office costs allowance to maximise the technological opportunities
for me and my staff to deal with a very demanding workload."
Last week, this newspaper revealed how Mr MacShane
submitted more than a dozen invoices to the Commons bearing the
heading of the European Policy Institute. Each bill was justified
by one line"research
and translation"followed by
a demand for fees ranging between £550 and £950.
The EPI, which has a ghost presence on the internet,
is controlled by his brother,[name].
We also revealed last month how Mr MacShane claimed
nearly £20,000 a year in expenses for an office based in
the garage of his South Yorkshire home.
The claim, totalling £125,000 over the past
seven years, covered the costs of running his official constituency
base from the shabby-looking garage at his semi-detached home
in Rotherham.
28 June 2009
3. Letter
to Mr Michael Barnbrook from the Commissioner, 2 July 2009
Thank you for your letter of 29 June asking to register
a formal complaint against Mr Denis MacShane MP.[257]
In your letter you say that you have not submitted
evidence in relation to your complaint. As you know, however,
I am required to consider whether the complainant has provided
me with sufficient evidence to justify at least a preliminary
inquiry into whether the Member has breached the rules. To meet
that requirement, you do need to submit the evidence which you
consider supports your complaint.
If, therefore, you would like me to consider instituting
an inquiry into your complaint, could you let me have the evidence
on which you would like to rely and an explanation of how you
believe the Member has breached the rules of the House?
2 July 2009
4. Letter
to the Commissioner from Mr Michael Barnbrook, 7 July 2009
With reference to your letter dated 2 July asking
me to supply evidence to substantiate my complaint against Denis
MacShane MP, that he has breached the rules of the House.[258]
The evidence is contained on the Parliament web site
under 'allowances by Members' on the following pages.
Computers
2004-05
Page 146 14/03/05 Notebook Travel
Computer £1050
2005-06
Page 111 02/11/05 Computer £834.23
Page 68 28/12/05 Portable Computer £554.96
Page 28 13/02/06 Computer £563.97
2006-07
Page 67 07/12/06 Computer £1276.59
2007-08
Page 103 05/07/07 Laptop Computer £611.12
Page 139 24/09/07 Laptop Computer £578.99
Page 57 11/01/08 Laptop Computer £498.95
Page 47 17/01/08 Notebook Computer £498.95
Consultancy and Translation Services
2004-05
Page 262 28/03/05 European Policy
Institute £550
Page 227 22/01/05 European Policy
Institute £850
Page 167 19/12/04 European Policy
Institute £650
Page 145 10/03/05 European Policy
Institute £850
Page 65 01/04/05 European Policy
Institute £750
Page 32 11/07/05 European Policy
Institute £750
2005-06
Page 217 05/08/05 European Policy
Institute £500
Page 132 12/10/05 European Policy
Institute £450
Page 90 09/12/05 European Policy
Institute £550
Page 43 30/01/06 European Policy
Institute £550
2006-07
Page 178 13/06/06 European Policy
Institute £750
Page 126 15/09/06 European Policy
Institute £750
Page 114 19/10/06 European Policy
Institute £950
Page 110 08/11/06 European Policy
Institute £550
Page 82 29/11/06 European Policy
Institute £850
Page 57 19/01/07 European Policy
Institute £550
2007-08
Page 108 30/10/07 European Policy
Institute £850
Page 74 29/11/07 European Policy
Institute £550
Page 69 04/01/08 European Policy
Institute £650
I have already fully explained how I consider Mr
MacShane to have breached the rules of the House in my letter
to you dated 29th June, 2009.[259]
I would remind you of your powers under Standing
Order 149, which gives you the authority to demand from any Member
documentation to assist you in any investigation that you instigate.
By using Standing Order 149, you will be able to
satisfy yourself whether the nineteen claims to the European Policy
Institute for £12,900 and Mr MacShane's use of his garage
as a constituency office, were justified.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
7 July 2009
5. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 15 July 2009
I would welcome your help on a complaint I have received
from Mr Michael Barnbrook about the arrangements for your parliamentary
office.
I attach a copy of the complainant's letters to me
of 29 June and 7 July.[260]
In essence, the complaint is that the costs you claimed against
the Incidental Expenses Provision for your constituency office
and certain office services and equipment were not wholly, exclusively
and necessarily incurred on your parliamentary duties, contrary
to the rules of the House. I have not accepted Mr Barnbrook's
complaint about the nature of your constituency office, as he
has not submitted any evidence to suggest that you may have breached
the rules of the House.
The Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament provides
in paragraph 14 as follows:
"Members shall at all times ensure that their
use of expenses, allowances, facilities and services provided
from the public purse is strictly in accordance with the rules
laid down on these matters, and that they observe any limits placed
by the House on the use of such expenses, allowances, facilities
and services."
The Green Book sets out the rules for claims against
the Incidental Expenses Provision, which include office and equipment
costs. The most relevant Green Books would appear to be the editions
published in April 2005 and in July 2006.
In Mr Speaker Martin's introduction to both editions,
he wrote as follows:
"Members themselves are responsible for ensuring
that their use of allowances is above reproach. They should seek
advice in cases of doubt and read the Green Book with care. In
cases of doubt or difficulty about any aspect of the allowances
or how they can be used, please contact the Department of Finance
and Administration. The Members Estimate Committee, which I chair,
has recently restated the Department's authority to interpret
and enforce these rules."
The rules in relation to the Incidental Expenses
Provision are set out in Section 5. For the purpose of this summary,
I shall quote from the April 2005 edition, although the references
are almost identical to those in the June 2003 and July 2006 editions.
The scope of the allowance is set out in paragraph 5.1.1 as follows:
"The incidental expenses provision (IEP)
is available to meet costs incurred on Members' Parliamentary
duties. It cannot be used to meet personal costs, or the costs
of party political activities or campaigning. The paragraphs which
follow outline the main areas of expenditure which we recognise
as incurred in supporting these duties, but it is each Member's
responsibility to ensure that all expenditure funded by the IEP
is wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred on Parliamentary
duties."
Allowable expenditure is set out in paragraph 5.3.1
as follows:
"The IEP may be used to meet the following
expenses:
- Accommodation for office or surgery useor
for occasional meetings
- Equipment and supplies for the office or surgery
- Work commissioned and other services
- Certain travel and communications.
In addition, you may transfer money from the IEP
to the staffing allowance to meet staffing costs."
And in paragraph 5.3.2:
"Section 5.13. lists examples of allowable
and non-allowable expenditure under these headings. Even if an
item is listed in the category of allowable expenditure, it is
only allowable if the spend is wholly, exclusively and necessarily
incurred on Parliamentary duties. For further guidance please
contact the help numbers above."
And paragraph 5.12.2 (5.12.1. of the June 2003 edition)
provides, under the heading 'Propriety':
"You must avoid any arrangement which may
give rise to an accusation that youor someone close to
youis obtaining an element of profit from public funds;
or that public money is being diverted for the benefit of a political
organisation."
Paragraphs 5.13.2 and 5.13.3 provide the following
examples allowable expenditure:
"5.13.2. Work commissioned and bought
in services
Note: With the exception of costs associated with
publications and websites, the costs listed below may also be
met from the staffing allowance, provided that in any given year
the costs of work commissioned do not exceed 25% of that budget.
Allowable expenditure:
- Interpreting and translation services
(This includes sign language, interpretation and
Braille translation)
- Research and media scanning services
- Consultancy eg on software or websites
Equipment and supplies for the office and/or
surgery
5.13.3: Allowable expenditure
?
Purchase or lease of photocopiers, faxes, scanners, phones and
other office equipment, including computers
?
Purchase of office furniture
?
Purchase of stationery and consumables
?
Purchase of hardware and software."
Section 12 of the Green Book provides as follows:
"Computers and other IT equipment for
Members and their offices
This equipment is free of charge, on loan to Members
for Parliamentary use only. It is provided by the Parliamentary
Communications Directorate (PCD) on behalf of the Department of
Finance and Administration.
Members can also use their IEP to buy additional
items, providing they are used solely for Parliamentary purposes.
Further details are on the Parliamentary Intranet
or via the help desk on [...]."
I would welcome your comments on this complaint in
the light of this summary of the relevant rules. In particular,
it would be helpful to know:
what computers provided free of charge by Parliament
you have used for your parliamentary duties since 2004-05 and
why you needed to buy each of the nine additional computers which
you purchased from your IEP over the four financial years beginning
in 2004-05;
whether the two separate claims in January 2008 for
£498.95 were for different computers or whether they refer
to the same machine;
what happened to each of these nine computers and
where they are now;
what services were provided to you by the European
Policy Institute in each financial year since 2004-05; why you
selected this organisation to provide these services and what
role if any your brother [name] had at the Institute and in the
provision of the services to you;
whether you consulted the then Department of Resources
(formerly the Department of Finance and Administration) or parliamentary
IT managers about any aspect of these arrangements.
Any other points you may wish to make would, of course,
be most welcome. I enclose a note which sets out the procedure
I follow. I have written to the complainant to let him know that
I have accepted his complaint and am writing to you about it.
I would be grateful if you could let me have a response
within the next three weeks. If there is any difficulty about
this, or you would like to have a word about any aspect of this
matter, please contact me at the House.
Thank you for your help on this.
15 July 2009
6. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 16 July 2009
Thank you for your letter of 15th July with the complaint
from [Mr Barnbrook].[261]
I fully understand that you have to deal fairly with anyone who
writes in with a complaint and I am glad of the opportunity to
answer any queries.
[Material not relevant to the inquiry]
[Mr Barnbrook] appears to have taken his complaint
from articles in the Mail on Sunday which over the years
has run unpleasant articles about me and invaded my privacy and
that of [...] and other family members.
I did give the Mail on Sunday statements of
explanation which they did not publish in full. Instead the paper
has taken stories from the Guardian in 2001 about the use
of my home in Rotherham for constituency work and about the European
Policy Institute which has organised conferences and publications
as well as research over the past two decades. The Mail on
Sunday then lifted almost verbatim a report in the Rotherham
Advertiser after that paper has gone in detail through the
IEP and ACA claims and found I had purchased a number of computers.
I did show all the unredacted claim forms to local journalists
just after the Telegraph broke its story.
I enclose an email which I sent to the Rotherham
Advertiser which is on their website and which I hope answers
all [Mr Barnbrook's] points.[262]
After I left office as Minister for Europe in 2005
I remained as active as ever on European political affairs. In
addition to serving as a UK delegate on the Council of Europe
and Nato Parliamentary Assembly the then Prime Minister asked
me to keep working as his unofficial political envoy in Europe.
It is no secret that as an MP I am known for my interest and knowledge
in European affairs based on extensive travel, meetings and taking
part in events with politicians on the continent.
That meant that since 2005 I have had a good number
of paid and unpaid researchers and interns working in my office
from the UK, USA and different European countries to help with
me with Parliamentary work on European (EU and wider Europe) and
international policy matters. I have always sought to provide
them with equipment including computers and took for granted that
the IEP could be used to make those purchases. I have also made
sure that my homes were equipped and I have bought light-weight
notebooks at airports. Some of these were replacement computers
for computers that broke down or had dysfunctiong keyboards. As
I write I am looking at two malfunctioning computers I bought
which when time permits I will take to PICT and ask to see if
they can be brought into service. My Sony broke down completely
while on a Parliamentary delegation visit in Washington DC last
November and could not be repaired. Writing this in my small Commons
office I can see two laptops in addition to the desktop I am writing
on and the Sony P lightweight notebook I have in my bag (in addition
to the two computers previously mentioned that do not work). I
saw an advert in the Times today for a more robust but
lightweight ACER laptop with 8 hours battery life which would
help me enormously when on the road. I will check on the point
about the two computers purchased in 2008. I think I was upgrading
computers in Rotherham. I do not think I could have submitted
the same invoice twice if that is what [Mr Barnbrook] alleges
and the Fees Office normally did check and pick up any discrepancy.
I have also had to organise research and translation
work in different corners of Europe. To this end, on leaving ministerial
office in 2005 I reactivated the European Policy Institute which
as I told the Mail on Sunday was founded as a network of
policy intellectuals in the 1990s and has published books, organised
conferences and commissioned research. My brother is on an old
letterhead as administrator but receives no payment or monies
and never has. He has had no direct involvement for some time.
All of this money claimed from under the IEP heading which in
the previous and new Green Book permitted research and translation
work was to carry on with my high level of European political
work as a UK parliamentarian and for which, as you know, there
is no payment or support of any kind.
To my certain knowledge the Fees Office has never
queried any receipt I have submitted and of course I have always
abided by their rulings.
I hope this reply helps clarify the points you raise
and of course I stand ready to help further in any way and to
abide by any decisions you come to.
[Material not relevant to the inquiry]
16 July 2009
7. Enclosure
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's letter of 16 July 2009: Statement
issued to the Rotherham Advertiser by Rt Hon
Denis MacShane MP, 25 June 2009
[Material not relevant to the inquiry]
In order to do my job as an MP I have to run two
offices, one in Westminster and one in Rotherham, as well as two
homes, one in Rotherham and a second in London. I see my prime
responsibility as an MP to meet and serve the needs of my Rotherham
constituentsindividually and collectively; play my full
role at Government at a national level; undertake those responsibilities
asked of me by the Government at an international level and, in
all these various roles doing my best to implement the policies
and politics for which people elected me as their MP.
I did not come into politics to manage budgets, supplies,
staffing etc and I am the first to acknowledge that this has not
had the important and detailed attention which with hindsight
I now realise I should have provided.
I spend a lot of time travelling and am on the road
a lot, so like others in similar roles, computers, mobile phones
and Blackberries are an absolute necessity and are in constant
use seven days a week. In both my offices I employ permanent and
part-time staff. Since 1994 I have always had one full-time constituency
assistant in Rotherham as well as other part-time employees. I
also have interns and short-term researchers working in my offices
and most of the equipment purchased has been for their use and
to ensure I have fully functioning offices. Camera, computer and
phone technology are ever changing and I have sought to use the
annual office costs allowance to maximise the technological opportunities
for me and my staff to deal with a very demanding workload.
[Material not relevant to the inquiry]
The Prime Minister has made it a requirement for
the expenses of all MPs in recent years to be checked by an independent
body. I am very happy with this arrangement and if this independent
scrutiny identifies any errors I will of course make the necessary
repayments, including [...] the cost of research and translation
work undertaken by the European Policy Institute in connection
with my European political activities.
[Material not relevant to the inquiry]
25 June 2009
8. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 20 July 2009
Thank you very much for your letter of 16 July responding
to mine of 15 July about this complaint in respect of the arrangement
for your parliamentary office.[263]
It was very helpful to have this and I do appreciate
receiving such a prompt response. I appreciate also that you are
now away for the next three weeks and so will not receive this
letter until after your return. Your initial response was, therefore,
particularly appreciated.
You have offered further help. It would certainly
be helpful to me if you could provide me with the following which
I covered in my letter of 15 July[264]:
what computers provided free of charge by Parliament
you have used since 2004-05 and a statement of the reasons for
purchasing each of the computers identified in the complainant's
list, and what happened to them. I appreciate that you may not
have kept detailed records, but it would be helpful to have as
accurate a recollection as possible of your reasons for buying
each one and what became of each one;
fuller details of each of the 19 claims identified
by the complainant for the work of the European Policy Institute
from 2004-05 to 2007-08 and why you selected this organisation
to provide these services to you. Again, it would be particularly
helpful to know what was bought or supplied by the institute for
each of the claims made. It would also be helpful to see examples
of the research and translation work which was covered by any
of these claims.
If you could let me have a response to this letter
when you return from leave I will take this forward, subject,
of course, to my own leave towards the end of August. Once I receive
your response, I am likely to seek advice and comments from the
Department of Resources.
Thank you again for your help.
20 July 2009
9. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 10 October
2009
I do most sincerely apologise for the time it has
taken to reply to your letters just before the holiday period.
I set out below as fully as I can my justification for using the
European Policy Institute to claim back moneys I spent working
on European affairs which I consider to be part and parcel of
my Parliamentary work. As I said to you my brother [...] has had
nothing to do with the EPI since some time and is not involved
in any way with claims in the period under review.
September has been very busy with visits to Madrid,
Berlin, Paris, Brussels and Strasbourg in connection with parliamentary
work [...]. That plus pre-election constituency work and normal
party political work in the conference season has left me with
little spare time. Now we wait for Sir T Legg's letters.[265]
I was taught at school the maxim "Non
Judicabit Deus bis in idipsum" but
it seems we are all to be judged and judged and judgedby
the press, by political opponents, by our peers, and by different
committee and then again by the press etc. Forgive this moan but
this whole processthe first in my 15 years as an MP and
indeed the first in nearly four decades of professional life regularly
claiming expenses and allowanceshas really weighed heavily.
I will reply later on the computers questions but
as I said to the press these were bought to have a fully equipped
facility for computer communication in two homes, as well as lightweight
travel computers, two of which broke down and needed replacement
as well as providing computers for the flow of interns or one-off
research assistants I have in my office.
European Policy Institute
The European Policy Institute was created in the
early 1990s in Geneva as an informal network of writers and political
activists interested in European affairs. It has published books
and reports and bulletins. It was used by different people as
a vehicle for payments and for publishing or conference organising
activities. It has no full-time staff. It has paid for travel,
research, translation, purchase of reports and books connected
to European political activities on an informal basis. I have
used it over a number of years to cover costs relating to my parliamentary
work, for example as Chair of the All-Party Committee of Enquiry
into Anti-Semitism (2005-2008) where no other source of parliamentary
funding was available or when travelling to prepare for the many
debates on European affairs including the debates on the Lisbon
Treaty.
2005
So in the final months of 2004 I was exploring the
impact on British politics of the new Zapatero government in Spain.
I collaborated with [name], formerly special adviser to Robin
Cook when Foreign Secretary who by then was based in Madrid. This
involved a trip to Madrid and a hotel stay plus purchase of books
and meetings with policy specialists and Spanish parliamentarians.
The costs were met from the EPI.
As former chair of the British-Swiss Parliamentary
Group and as someone who lived and worked in Geneva for a number
of years before becoming an MP in 1994 I have always taken a keen
interest in Swiss political and economic affairs and made a point
of travelling regularly to Berne, Geneva and Zurich to meet MPs
and officials there. So in January 2005 I made such a trip using
the EPI for reimbursement. I commissioned a report from a Geneva
based consultant, [name], for which I paid (from memory) CHF 500
in cash.
This was followed by a visit to Warsaw ahead of the
Polish accession to the European Union. My father was a Polish
army officer newly commissioned in 1939 who was wounded in the
September campaign against the Wehrmacht at the beginning of WW2
and who then escaped to France to be evacuated to Scotland. There
he met my mother. I was a main go-between for western trade unions
and the Solidarity trade union in 1980-1981 and was briefly imprisoned
in 1982 by the communists when caught running money to the underground
Polish Solidarity union. Since becoming an MP I have taken a sustained
interest in Polish links. Not having the language, alas, I have
used the EPI to pay informally for research and translation as
well as to cover flight and hotel costs as in the spring of 2005.
Spring 2005
The payments claimed here relate to an intense period
of activity prior to and connected with the presumed general election
that year. I asked my network of correspondents to prepare reports
on how Britain was seen from the point of view of various European
countries in order to prepare debating points and arguments for
use in parliament and in media and Commons debates with the Conservative
opposition.
The EPI produced an analysis in different languages
as well as a report under my name on the position of Labour's
sister parties in the EU.
Summer 2005
The key issue in Europe in this period were the referendums
in France and the Netherlands on the constitutional Treaty. The
issue was a hot subject in the Commons and in order to brief myself
as fully as possible I travelled to France and the Netherlands
[to] investigate on the ground what the arguments were. I bought
a considerable number of newspapers, magazines and books over
this period which I used EPI payments to cover. I had research
undertaken in different capitals on how they would react to the
No from the French and the Dutch. These informed my interventions
in the House and in British public debate on the issue in which
I took a leading part in this period.
Autumn 2005
The Prime Minister asked me to be his envoy to European
political parties and personalities meeting people informally
and reporting back to No 10principally to his European
adviser, [name] and his chief of staff, [name]. I met the PM at
Downing Street to report on my impressions and to help him keep
informed from other than formal diplomatic sources on development
in Europe. As is well-known Whitehall has no way of paying for
this kind of work undertaken at the Prime Minister's request which
involves travel, research, contacts, hotels, purchase of books
and journals etc. For wealthy individuals like, for example, [name]
who also acted as an unofficial envoy for the PM in Latin America
and the Middle East has considerable personal wealth to allow
him to pay all costs associated with that job. I had four [...]
children, two mortgages, and an MP's salary so felt it was reasonable
to use the Commons allowances to cover costs of work that lay
at the centre of my Parliamentary activities. In this period,
I spoke in every FCO question session usually on Europe and in
most foreign policy and international debates. I wrote a great
deal, occasionally for payment as recorded in the Register for
Members' Interests, but usually unpaid and broadcast regularly
on my Parliamentary work on European political affairs. I spoke
at events all over the country and in Europe on European affairs.
Again, I could not have undertaken this intense level of work
in which up-to-date knowledge of EU developments and European
political affairs (much of it only available in languages which
needed translating) without being able to call on the modest sums
claimed via the EPI.
2006
The work as a personal envoy for the PM continued
throughout the year. In the first months of 2006 I went to Switzerland
twice to meet with Swiss politicians, editors and diplomats. The
issue of the Swiss negotiating an agreement with the EU to allow
free movement of people was important. Some years previously I
had persuaded the Government to allow Swiss citizens to enter
the UK using the same channel at airports as EU citizens. Now
the Swiss were involved in tricky negotiations, which involved
Britain as an interlocutor, with the European Commission on free
movement of people and solidarity payments by the Swiss to the
EU.
I went to Paris to promote the cause of recognition
of Kosovo which was a priority for the Government. I met French
politicians and ambassadors of key states to press the case. In
the spring I travelled to Pristina for meetings with Kosovan political
leaders. By now I was established as a UK delegate to the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe and to the NATO Parliamentary
Assembly. This was parliamentary work outside of the Commons and
being informed, briefed and up-to-date on European political and
defence/security matters required intensive research, briefing
and translation which was covered by EPI payments.
In February 2006 I went to Poland and prepared a
report on Polish politics for the PM at his request. On average
over this period I tried to go to Poland at least twice a year.
I have family links and was arrested and briefly imprisoned by
the Polish communists in 1982 when caught running money to the
underground Solidarity union. I do not speak Polish beyond a few
words and have had to ask for translations of material in order
to be fully briefed.
In March 2006 I went to Berlin at the PM's request
to talk to the Energy Minister, Sigmund Gabriel and the leadership
of the Social Democratic Party then in coalition with the CDU.
This was useful to my parliamentary interventions on EU energy
policy and on the foreign policy approach of the new German coalition
government. I met diplomats and editors there and bought 100+
worth of books on aspects of German politics. Again I used EPI
claimed for money to help cover the costs of these trips which
I consider helped to improve my ability to contribute as an MP
to the UK debate on German and EU politics.
By this stage I was chairing the All-Party Commission
of Enquiry into Anti-Semitism. This was set up in 2005 and reported
in September 2006. Iain Duncan-Smith, Chris Huhne and Lady Sylvia
Hermon were amongst the 12 members of the Commission many of them
former ministers or Privy Councillors.
I travelled to Paris, Amsterdam, again to Berlin
and Rome to have talks with different Jewish organisations. I
used EPI money claimed in 2006 to help defray costs and to have
translations done and buy books in French and German on anti-Semitism.
The autumn of 2006 saw travel to Italy, Bulgaria,
Hungary, the Czech Republic and to Berlin to speak on my Commission's
report on anti-Semitism. The EPI payments recorded in September,
October, and November of 2006 helped cover these costs as well
as helping with translation into and from different European languages.
2007
2007 was more or less the same as the previous two
years and two succeeding years in terms of regular visits to different
parts of Europe, the purchase of journals and book and organising
translations. I was in France in the spring of 2007 in connection
with the French presidential election. I was now working actively
on combating anti-Semitism at the European level, meeting politicians
and researchers on this issue and reading widely which involved
buying books which I used money claimed under the EPI heading
to pay for. In April 2007 the Government produced its Command
Paper response to my Commission's report. A key recommendation
was the need to engage in European and international parliamentary
and government work to fight and expose anti-Semitism. This was
a new area of parliamentary workreflected in questions
and contributions to debatesin addition to my continuing
work on European politics where my contributions in the House
and public debate in 2007 are a matter of record also required
being in touch with politicians and researchers in different European
countries where anti-Semitism is a problem.
I spent time in France after the election in May
2007 to gauge the changes in the way France was likely to approach
issues like the problems of immigration by asylum seekers clustered
on the north French coast who seek entry into the UK. At each
of my fortnightly surgeries in Rotherham about half the people
who come along are asylum seekers who make no secret they arrived
via people smuggling criminal gangs who use lorries to bring asylum
seekers and economic migrants in from France. Finding out from
French politicians and officials about this problem was a contribution
to my ability to intervene usefully in this area of European politics.
I was by now actively researching contemporary European
anti-Semitism which involved visits to Frankfurt and Grenoble.
I was invited by Jacques Delors to join a committee to draw up
a short-list for the European Book of the Year on which I still
serve. Again, there were no funds to cover the costs of travel
and staying in Paris for these meetings and since I used them
to try and advance the case of British writers, including helping
to steer the committee to chose the work of British historian
[...] in 2008 I thought it reasonable to use EPI money to cover
these costs.
I hope the above arguments provide some background
as I explained in previous letters to you why I believe it was
reasonable to claim moneys for parliamentary activity which could
not be sourced in any other way.
I enclose copies of work translated into different
European languages over the period concerned, some of which was
covered by EPI payments.[266]
As I told you on the phone I am happy to abide by
any judgement you make. If told to make rectification I will do
so but with some concern as it will mean that in the future I
will not be able to be as engaged on European political work which
has informed all my Parliamentary work in recent years.
10 October 2009
10. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 14 October
2009
Thank you for your letter of 10 October[267]
responding to my letter to you of 20 July[268]
about this complaint in respect of your claim against the incidental
expenses provision from 2004-05 to 2008-09.
In my letter of 20 July[269],
I asked for further details of each of the 19 claims identified
by the complainant for the work of the European Policy Institute
for 2004-05 to 2007-08. Your letter helpfully describes the activities
you undertook with the support of the EPI over those years. I
think it would be helpful for me to have as clear an idea as possible
of what each of the claims covered, and I have, therefore, drawn
up the attached schedule based on the information you have provided.[270]
I would be most grateful if you would
either confirm or amend the attached schedule, which
I will then use as a basis for this inquiry.[271]
In particular, I would be grateful if you could provide information
about the payments claimed on 9 December 2005, 29 November 2007
and 4 January 2008. It would also be helpful if you could explain
why there is apparently such a wide variation in costs for the
various activities you describe;
help me on how much you spent on translation, research
and books and how much on accommodation and travel within each
of these claims;
confirm that the 30 or so articles you sent me, for
which I was very grateful, were all researched or translated (or
both) by the EPI;
confirm the date when your brother ceased to be involved
with the EPI;
clarify for me your own involvement with the EPI.
I see from your letter of 16 July that you reactivated the institute
when you left ministerial office in 2005.[272]
Could you let me know how you did that; whether you hold any position
with the EPI, and (if possible) what proportion of the EPI income
for each of the years in question was represented by your claims
(or if not how I could get hold of that information) and whether
you considered an alternative supplier for your translation and
research work.
It would be very helpful if you could let me have
a response to this letter in the next three weeks. Meanwhile,
I look forward to receiving a response to my question about your
purchase of computers which I included to my letter to you of
20 July.[273]
14 October 2009
11. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 29 October
2009
I am replying to your letter of 14th October[274]
which I enclose for ease of reference and I hope I have covered
the points you raise in the enclosed documents.[275]
I would be happy to meet you if you have further questions.
As you can imagine I have been turning over and over
in my mind this issue in the months since the initial Mail
on Sunday report and then [Mr Barnbrook's] complaint.
Was I wrong to use the IEP expenses system to claim
payments made to the EPI which in essence was a way of being reimbursed
for what I sincerely considered to be expenses connected to my
parliamentary work on Europe where, it would be fair to say, I
am one of the most active of Parliamentarians?
At the time my answer would have been No. All my
working life first as a BBC producer, then as a trade unionist,
and since 1994 as an MP I have used systems of allowances and
expenses to help me do my job without bothering too much about
anything other than getting the job in hand done. I confess I
am casual and careless on expenses and if anything spend moneys
without getting receipts and not claiming. I wish MPs had a personal
finance officer to do all the filing, listing and claiming. My
desk is awash with tiny receipts and documents from my tax return
to mileage forms which have not been completed.
But today, as we all face the public concern over
how MPs have claimed expenses I realise that what was done in
the past is no longer acceptable. I hope you will find that my
claims were reasonable. But as I told you on the phone if you
judge that rectification of all or part of the claims about which
the complaint is made are necessary then of course I shall comply
under clause B of subparagraph 3 of Standing Order 150 as set
out on pages 20-21 of your 2008-2009 report.[276]
29 October 2009
12. Enclosure
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's letter of 29 October 2009: Notes
for Parliamentary Commissioner
Notes for Parliamentary Commissioner - following
his schedule of queries as in his letter of 14th October 2009[277]
Points 1 and 2)
9 December 2005.
I was asked in November 2005 by [name] the Prime
Minister's Chief European Advisor to go to Paris to talk to editors
and French opinion-makers about the crisis over the EU budget.
I noted at the time that he said: "[Chief
of Staff] and Tony would appreciate it if you could go and talk
to any of your friends and spell it out that this is the last
chance of getting a deal on the budget."
The trip to Paris was around the order of £350 for a return
fare, 20-30 for taxis. Sometimes I would stay with friends or
with the British Ambassador if he had a spare room at the residence,
or else at a modest hotel like the [name of hotel] which costs
around 120. I used the EPI payments to cover these costs.
I did not exactly list every cost but averaged what I paid out
so that I was not out of pocket. The civil service allowance for
travel abroad varies from country to country but I sought to stay
under it within my own framework of what was fair to charge to
undertake parliamentary and political work. I used this time to
do some research for an essay on the legacy of Francois Mitterrand.
The tenth anniversary of his death fell in the period covered
by this EPI payment. I referred to this in parliamentary and political
work at the time.
I made a second trip also to Paris early December
2005 to meet [name], the editor of le
Monde, to make the argument for UK interests.
To the best of my recollection I stayed in the UK Ambassador's
residence in Paris so there were no hotel costs. The EPI payment
referred to above was to help defray the costs of these trips
and other general work and sums expended in connection with my
European parliamentary/political work.
29 November 2007
This covers two tripsone to Berlin to keep
in touch with political and parliamentary colleagues there. As
I recall I went on a fairly cheap flight around the £150
mark but I also bought books and informed myself on the German
approach to the Lisbon Treaty as we were limbering up for the
Lisbon Treaty debates in the Commons in which I was one of the
main and regular speakers from the Government side. On 18th November
I made a trip to Paris to interview a set of possible replacement
PA's for my Parliamentary office. I have always sought to have
at least one of my full-time co-workers in the Commons from an
EU member state in addition to the network of EPI collaborators.
I also paid cash 100 to EPI collaborator, [name] for help
with a paper I used later in debates.
I freely confess that I did not make an exact listing
of every receipt for taxis, books, journals, meals, etc. I have
attached below a list of books bought. I could of course have
asked the Library to procure them for me but as I saw them in
bookshops [on my] travels in Europe it seemed easier and more
natural to buy them and use EPI claims to cover costs. The differences
in claims simply were whether one or more trip was involved -
each averaging around £400 and whether I had forgotten to
claim for one in a previous claim.
4 January 2008
This covered a pre-Christmas trip to Warsaw to meet
EPI collaborators [names] and hold meetings with Gazeta Wyborcza
editor [name]. I paid [the second collaborator] 200 for
help with translation and bought [the first collaborator] a very
large dinner for his continuing help with my queries about political
developments in Polanda country I track closely but without
any Polish beyond simple courtesies I need help with translation
of material and with interpretation. Again I sought the cheapest
possible airfare and stayed with the UK Ambassador there. But
the total amount spent on the trip was in excess of £600.
I enclose a list of books bought though I appear
to have mislaid one sheet listing French books which I will try
and find to send on to you.[278]
Point 3)
Most of the articles in foreign languages I sent
you were researched and some were translated by EPI friends or
researched by myself on EPI funded trips. I have good French and
reasonable German and Spanish but cannot write with grammatical
perfection in any European language so would ask EPI collaborators
to help do initial drafts or polish up work prior to publication.
I would make modest cash payments as and when I saw people who
helped me or entertain at my (EPI) expense as a payment in kind.
Point 4)
My brother, [name], kindly let me use his London
address and name when the EPI was launched in 1992 when I lived
and worked in Geneva. But he never took any direct, active part
in its work other than the use of one of his business addresses
in London to receive mail etc. He is still very upset that the
Mail on Sunday
used his name and I deeply regret that instead of making a "No
Comment" to the paper they took my
words to mean that he was currently engaged and active which is
not true.
[...] I have told him that I have told you that he
is in no way to be linked with the EPI and that I accept full
responsibility. He seems to think it is a matter just of repaying
(rectifying any EPI) moneys and [...] while I am willing to make
any rectification you demand I do honestly believe that the moneys
claimed were connected with my parliamentary work on European
affairs. [...] Therefore let me stress that I and I alone take
all responsibility in this matter and [name] has not been linked
to the EPI in any formal sense since the middle 1990s.
Point 5)
As I wrote to you previously, the EPI was set up
by a group of pro-European policy writers, journalists and activists
in the 1990s. It produced reports, published books and organised
conferences. Right now it has a project to prepare a multi-lingual
report on the current state of play of Turkey's bid to join the
EU. There is another book project. I was by far the main organiser,
editor. I used it carry on my European parliamentary work in terms
of travel, translation, etc. after I stopped being a minister.
I also used the EPI to help defray costs related to my work as
Chair of the All-Party Committee of Inquiry into Anti-Semitism
that began in 2005 with reference to material from continental
Europe on this issue. Most of the income since 2005 in the EPI
has been from the IEP claims I made.
The EPI is not an office and has never been above
the VAT threshold as all moneys going in and have been paid out
to cover costs. It was just easier to cover the costs of what
I was doing using this means. I accept fully that this arrangement
was informal and unusual but at the time it made sense in terms
of my trying to maintain a high level of involvement in European
affairs which I considered necessary for carrying out my parliamentary
duties. I accept fully as I told you on the phone there may have
been some overlap between parliamentary and political involvement
in European affairs but since I am regularly called upon by the
media to comment on aspects of European politics as they pertain
to the House of Commons I could see no other way of funding this
work save by using the EPI as a means of securing reimbursement
for moneys paid out. I am clear in my own mind that what I claimed
was to cover expenses connected with my work as an MP but I can
also understand that others may place a different interpretation.
I am happy to rectify any payments if so directed either in whole
or in part.
Books Purchased Using EPI Expenses
L'Etat du monde, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2007 2008 25
each 150
S Scheil Logik der Machte: Europa und Globaliserung 36
HJ Schrotter Europa Lexicon 19.90
M Geyer Operation Rot-Griin 15
S Aust Der Fall Deutschland 20
M Schmidt Das politische System Deutschland 12.80
T Baumann Die Spinnen, die Deutschen 8
U Beck Kosmopolitisches Europa 18
S Wanniger New Labour und die EU 29
Langenscheit Worterbuch 75
B Engelmann Du deutsch SFR17.80
F Merli Das neue Polen in Europa 55
G Quenzel Konstruktion von Europa 28
G Schröder Erinnerung 30
Dicionaria de la lengua espanol 42
J Reverte El Arte de Matar 28
[Note: Manuscript note on list says at this point
that there is a full page missing which will be supplied later.
No such list has been received.]
Pour l'Europe, R. Schuman 15
Ceuta, Melilla, Olivenza y Gibraltar. Dónde
acaba Espana?, M. Cajal 16
Deutsche Aphorismen, F. Hindermann 12
Plus encore ! F. de Closets 20.90
Entscheidungen, G. Schroeder 28
Les Juifs au Pays du Mont Blanc, G. Grandjacques 23
Frere Tariq, C. Fourest 19.50
Le liquidateur, P. Moscovici 18
La discorde, R. Brauman 20
Adieu a terminus, J. Kuntz SFR
39.70
Supplique aux progressistes, R. Debray 5.50
Le croissant et le chaos, 0. Roy 14
Le monde moderne, E. Morin SF 23.70
Le pouvoir et la vie, V. Giscard d'Estaing 21.90
L'Europe, L. Febvre 24
Un antisemitisme ordinaire. R. Badinter 10
Le discours de la haine, A. Glucksman 18
Juifs et Arabes au XXe siècle, M. Abitbol 9.50
Iran, le choix des armes ? F. Heisbourg 15.50
L'islamisme en face, F. Burgat 12
La verite sur Tariq Ramadan, I. Hamel 19
La furza de los pocos, A. Ortega (60)
La genese des trait& de Rome, Fondation Jean
Monnet 34
Dieudonne &masque, A-S. Mercier 18
Al Qaeda in its own words, G. Keppel £21
Computers Bought by D MacShane MP
14.3.05 This was a lightweight Sony Vaio bought for
travel use. It was not very robust.
2.11.05 This was bought when I moved to a new home
[...] and installed a computer there.
28.12.05 This was bought for my then PA/Intern, [name],
who was doing research work for me often in another office in
the Commons as well as at her home. I should explain that my office
in the Commons [...] is about the size of a large railway carriage
and I have required researchers/interns often to do some of their
work away from the Commons and felt it reasonable to provide them
with the tools to do the job.
13.02.06 This was bought to replace the Sony Vaio
computer which had broken down.
7.12.06 This was bought to have a hi-quality computer
in my study in my constituency home.
5.07.07 This was bought for a new researcher working
on Spanish political affairs, [name] who was doing work for me,
often away from the office.
24.09.07 This was bought for [name], my dictation
typist who has worked from her home for me for 15 years. She said
her computer was out of date, which it was, and I felt it reasonable
as I was within the spending limits to provide equipment (dictation
transcription machines, computer, printer etc) for her to carry
out parliamentary work for me.
11.01.08 This was bought for [name], a PA/intern
who had to work from home, at nights and over the weekend.
17.01.08 This was bought for [name], a PA/Intern
who was carrying out research and who needed a computer to work
away from the office at weekends, evenings etc.
29 October 2009
13. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 10 November
2009
Thank you very much for your letter of 29 October[279]
responding to mine of 14 October[280]
about this complaint. In view of its complexity, I hope it might
be helpful if I summarize again where we have got to and identify
any points that need clarification before I seek advice from the
Department of Resources.
Referring to the EPI, I attach first a revised schedule
of the payments you made to the EPI, summarizing the evidence
you have given to me.[281]
As you will see, it reflects the fact that you are not able to
provide a full breakdown of your expenditure or the categories
under which it was incurred. If this is incorrect or the summary
is insufficient in any regard, please let me know at once. Otherwise,
I will take it as a reasonable and accurate summary of your evidence
of the payments you made to EPI.
Secondly, could you let me know why instead of claiming
via the EPI for research, translation, literature and travel costs,
you did not claim these directly from your allowances, where permissible?
And thirdly, I would be grateful if you could confirm
the status of this organization. Is it, for example, a virtual
organization which was used by you to make payments direct for
a range of facilities and services as described in your evidence
to me? Could you help me on the arrangements for this organization
does it have a bank account and office holders; is it
a company or partnership; who are its employees; and could I see
copies of its accounts for the relevant years?
On your expenditure on computers, I was grateful
for the information about nine computers which you purchased.
I would be grateful if you could help me clarify the following
points:
1. I am having some difficulty reconciling this list
with the information you provided in your letter to me of 16 July.[282]
I note you refer to a Sony Vaio computer which broke down on a
visit to Washington DC in November 2008. That is not, of course,
relevant to this particular complaint, but perhaps you could confirm
whether that is the same computer for which you claimed on 13
February 2006, replacing the Sony for which you claimed on 14
March 2005.
2. Could you also confirm that you were mistaken
in suggesting in your letter of 16 July that the two computers
purchased in 2008 were to upgrade computers in Rotherham?[283]
It would appear from the note attached to your letter of 29 October
that they were in fact bought for two PAs/interns.[284]
3. Could you let me know, as requested in my initial
letter to you of 15 July, where each of these nine computers is
now?[285]
From what you have told me, it would seem that two were bought,
in about November 2005 and December 2006, for your own use at
home (one for your main home and one for your constituency home).
I assume they are still working and are being used for your parliamentary
duties. It seems that two Sony Vaios were bought for travel use
- but it may well be that neither is still working. The remaining
five were bought for your staff, but it is not clear if you still
have these computers, even if the staff themselves have since
moved on. I would be grateful for clarification of this;
4. Finally, could you let me know what computers
provided free of charge by Parliament you have used since 2004-05
as requested in my letters to you of 15 and 20 July and could
you let me know why you needed the bought computers in addition
to the free provision.[286]
I would like to make progress with this inquiry,
so would be very grateful if you could respond to this in the
next two weeks.
Thank you for your help.
10 November 2009
14. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 19 November
2009
I am replying, in part and in haste, to your letter
of 10th November which I have just got.[287]
I am just back from Brussels and was in Edinburgh at the Nato
Parliamentary Assembly 13-16 November and then in the Chamber
to speak in the Queen's Speech yesterday before getting a 0507
train in Brussels this morning. I have to get to my constituency
tonight and then travel to Newcastle tomorrow to chair a major
UK-Spanish political and business conference until Sunday. This
letter is written in haste as I try and get out to catch my train
north. I put all this down to try and indicate that it is not
absence of good will but just immense pressure of time and work
that is delaying my reply.
I now find as I hunt around my desk that I cannot
find my file (and am very concerned in case it has been removed
deliberately but, sadly, I am the worst paper organiser and record
keeper in the world so it is probably lost in the midst of a mass
of other papers and will turn up) but I do recall that my letter
to you of 29 October[288]
was based on your 2-page letter of 14th October which asked me
to reply to a schedule.[289]
I had assumed there might be some piece of extra paper with a
list in it but there was none so I tried to give detail of the
3 dates you required. I now see from the note headed "Payments
to EPI" that you appear to want much
greater details covering all of the claims not just the three
mentioned in your letter.
Is this the case? I will comply of course with all
requests but this will require more research into notebooks etc
to provide the details you want. I will be in my office I hope
with some time to work on all of this next week and if you can
call me or let me know exactly what dates you want an explanation
for I will do my best to provide it.
19 November 2009
15. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 23 November
2009
Thank you for your letter of 19 November[290]
following up mine of 10 November[291]
summarising where I thought we had got to on my inquiries into
this complaint and asking you for some additional information,
both in respect of the EPI and your expenditure on computers.
I attach a further copy of my letter to you of 14
October,[292]
to which I annexed the first draft of a schedule intended to summarise
the information you had given me in your letter of 10 October.[293]
As you will see, I asked a number of follow-up questions. The
schedule left blank the explanation for three dates: 9 December
2005, where you had claimed £550; 29 November 2007, where
you had claimed £550; and 4 January 2008, where you had claimed
£650. I am sorry if it was not clear to you that those were
the gaps I needed to have filled, as well as needing responses
to the additional issues I described in that letter.
I sent you on 10 November a revised schedule[294]
which summarised for the three dates the information which you
had sent me in your letter of 29 October.[295]
These were identified by being typed in italics and explained
in the footnote. The schedule, with the detailed explanations
given, was otherwise unchanged from the version I sent you on
14 October. I attach a copy of that letter of 10 November.[296]
You ask whether I would like to have much greater
details covering all the claims you have made in respect of the
work undertaken by the EPI. The answer is that it would be helpful
to have a full breakdown of each of the claims you have made in
respect of the EPI, together with the relevant invoices. When
I wrote to you on 20 July, I asked for fuller details of each
of these 19 claims, including what was bought or supplied by the
institute for each of the claims made.[297]
The schedule attached to my letter of 14 October[298]
identified the information you had provided in your letter of
10 October.[299]
As you will see from my letter of 10 November, I thought it right
to point out that that the information you had provided did not
give me a full breakdown of your expenditure or the categories
under which it was incurred.[300]
If you have such information, in whatever level of detail you
have retained it, including invoices identifying the services
provided and the costs of those services in each of your relevant
claims, then it would be very helpful to have it. I will then
be able to revise the schedule and provide a much clearer understanding
how each of these claims was built up. If, however, you have given
me all that you can, I ask you to confirm this, and I will then
take the summary as the best information you can now provide me
with.
The outstanding information I have requested therefore
relates to the computers provided free of charge by Parliament
since 2004-05 and what happened to each of the nine computers
you bought and where they are now, which I asked about on 15 July;[301]
and to the claims you made for payments to the EPI. I hope it
will be possible for you to provide this information in the next
two weeks. But if you remain unclear about this request, or would
otherwise like to have a word, please do contact me at the House.
Thank you for your help.
23 November 2009
16. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 1 December
2009
This is a further holding letter as I have been handling
in recent months [personal information] todaywhich would
have been dedicated to trying to finalise a reply to your pointshas
been spent in [personal information].
Sunday-Wednesday of next week I am at the Congress
of the Party of European Socialists in Prague and then at non-stop
events Thursday-Monday 14th December in my constituency.
I have been spending more time trying to contact
people and recall trips and work connected with my European parliamentary/political
activity related to EPI claims than on almost any other bit of
parliamentary work since returning from the summer break. The
BNP knows what it is doing when it makes this complaint based
on the newspaper reports sensationalised in the summer.[302]
As the Legg inquiries show, the plain fact is that
MPs are not book-keepers and do not have tidy files and records
since our work is as public representatives and public policy
people, not clerks or accountants.
I am trying my best to get up early and find moments
to reply to all your queries going back over 5 years of work.
I am contact with different people around Europe and elsewhere
in the world. I would have hoped to finish this this week but
[...] has completely thrown me off-kilter. There is no need to
reply to this letter which I write in haste to let you know I
am trying to give you what you have asked for as fast as I humanly
can.
1 December 2009
17. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 11 January
2010
I try to set out below my replies to your letters
of 10th November and 23rd November 2009.[303]
I apologise for lateness in reply. You kindly wrote to me after
[personal information] which necessitated a degree of organisation
[personal information].[304]
I was travelling extensively in December and after the New Year.
And to be honest it is rather hard to be campaigning against the
BNP in my constituency and nationally ([the BNP] target me especially
given my writings and interventions attacking their anti-Semitic
and xenophobic politics) and then have to justify my European
work and the research I carried out or had commissioned which
I claimed for.
I am attaching further documents relevant to EPI's
existence.[305]
It is frustrating that reports, pamphlets and books the EPI published
including a major one on the Euro for Robin Cook or a collection
of essays on international labour issues by Lord Brett are not
to hand. MPs have no storage space and my office drowns in paper
as it is so material is ruthlessly disposed of. I attach letters
from academics and others on the continuing existence of the EPI.[306]
The 2005 Green Book at the start of this period (Section
5.13.2) allowed payments for research, interpreting and translation
services. I took this to cover carrying out my own research based
on face-to-face contacts in addition to translations of articles/notes
you have been sent. I have asked people paid for by EPI payments
to send in statements which I attach and they show payments of
5,700 plus US$950.[307]
I attach these receipt statements. Others who have helped me include
government officials and employees of NGOs who would prefer not
to make formal statements of modest EPI payments since as I understand
it anything I send to you may end up published on the record.
As I explained in earlier letters I felt that in
order to maintain my parliamentary work as one of the House's
"experts" on
Europe I needed to maintain a level of face-to-face contact and
dialogue with EU politicians and policy/opinion formers across
the range. I can speak three European languages but need help
with translation and such help was paid for in cash since to go
through a formal translation/interpretation agency is costly and
cumbersome.
I did on occasion claim the European Travel Allowance
which is quite limited but this did not allow the flexibility
of visits and arrangements, often made at short notice that I
required. Moreover the European Travel Allowance pays full business
class and hotel costs so that, for example, a trip to any remoter
European capital can cost £2,000 or more. The Department
of Resources can confirm this. Many of the EPI payments made,
including for Easyjet travel, came under the £250 limit required
for receipts. I have never charged the IEP for office rental and
felt it was reasonable to use some of the permitted IEP allowance
to carry out my European research. In order to maximise visit
possibilities I felt it better to make two or even three trips
rather than limit myself to the 3 x per annum European Extended
Travel visit. In my judgement if the House permitted any number
of Extended Travel trips within the UK in connection with Parliamentary
work it was reasonable to seek, within the overall limits of the
IEP allowance, to make some low-costs trips to Europe as part
of my continuing interventions in the House on Europe. I also
used EPI moneys to have translated articles which you have been
sent.
I have no private income or external sponsors to
allow this work to be carried out. I felt that using the EPI as
a vehicle to cover costs and payments was reasonable though in
the light of new, stringent interpretations on what MPs can and
cannot claim for I accept that I may have been too relaxed in
making claims. As I have said I am willing to make rectifications
if that is so decided.
I have been hunting through old files to show reports
and books and conferences published and organised by the EPI.
It is not a company, nor a partnership (in the sense of lawyers
or GPs) has no office, and a bank account which has never reached
VAT registrable levels so there have been no accounts to audit
or submit. I enclose letters from [name of EPI contact], [name
of EPI contact], and [name of EPI contact] which refer to their
invitations to me in connection with EPI activity to speak at
events.
In the last Parliament as I ceased to be a Minister
I used the EPI almost entirely to cover the costs I have described
and to claim from the Fees Office to cover those costs. In the
next Parliament, (assuming my re-election) I plan to upgrade its
activities with a full-time researcher/organiser, [name] (currently
with the Party of European Socialists in Brussels) but even then
it will be located in our respective computers and I doubt if
it will ever attain the status of a full-scale office operation.
It is already commissioned to publish a report on the new barriers
to Turkey's future admission to the European Union and I will
be travelling to Istanbul to carry out work in that regard. I
would it [were] possible for me as an MP to exercise my judgement
on what work I need to carry out. For good or ill I am an expert
on European affairs. Other colleagues may travel freely using
Extended Travel allowances to any corner of the UK to research
matters or meet people in connection with matters before Parliament.
I have spoken more on European issues than any other subject in
the last five years and rightly or wrongly felt it reasonable
to use the EPI as a payment method for researching this work which
was to help me as an MP. As previously stated I am content to
make rectifications and apologise to the S&P Committee if
you so decide.
11 January 2010
18. Enclosure
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's letter of 11 January 2010: Note
on computers
Computers
1) I have slightly lost track of the computer saga.
As with Blackberries, Palm Pilots, mobile phones, printers, photo-copiers
and other office equipment I treat computers as tools to be used,
discarded, bought for co-workers and provided I was within the
office costs allowance limit I gave no thought to the cost of
purchase. The lap-tops provided by the Commons authorities are
clunky, slow and heavy. There is one Commons lap-top in my office.
[These] keyboards are notoriously sticky after about a year's
use and I would have replaced one of these in my work areas in
Rotherham and [London]. But I do not keep any kind of file or
inventory of all this electronic equipment. I discussed this with
other MP colleagues and they buy different bits of equipment like
expensive colour printers or colour photo-copiers or more expensive
Apple Mac computers as they and staff do not like the PC type
computers supplied centrally. To be honest I could not account
for mobile phones or printers though the complainant and the press
could have just as easily have listed all of those from the published
IEP claims.
2) Some of these computers are just lying gathering
dust in my offices or have been thrown away when they stopped
working properly. As with printers and fax machines that are bought,
break down and in due course thrown away. I do not get any inventory
of computers. They were bought as and when for myself and for
staff as listed in previous notes to sent to you.
3) I have bought 3 Sony Vaios for travel use as they
are wonderfully light but not very robust. Two of these broke
down and one was replaced by a more modern version with wi-fi.
4) The Commons provided computers with operating
systems and word programmes that become out-of-date and which
are not Wi-fi equipped. I am writing this on a mainframe that
keeps glueing up and where I have spent frustrating hours talking
to PICT or getting their engineers around. I do not use any of
the Commons laptops though I can see two in my office as I write.
If we had been told by the Fees Office not to buy equipment which
in my judgement I needed for myself and staff I would have complied
but in my 15 years as an MP I have always bought whatever equipment
I wanted provided it was within the limits of the allowance. I
have tried to allocate different computers to different researchers/interns
who have worked for me.
11 January 2010
19. Enclosure
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's letter of 11 January 2010: Letter
from a remunerated EPI collaborator (1), 22 December 2009
(Approximate translation of letter
sent in French)
I understand that there is some
question over the payments you made to me in connection with your
parliamentary work under the auspices of the European Policy Institute.
I am writing to confirm to whom it may concern that in 2005, 2006,
2007, 2008 and 2009 you have paid me in cash SFR 400 each year
in addition to hospitality when you have visited Geneva for translation,
research and other general advice on political developments in
Switzerland as they relate to the United Kingdom. I hope this
is helpful.
22 December 2009
20. Enclosure
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's letter of 11 January 2010: Letter
from a remunerated EPI collaborator (2), 23 December 2009
I am sorry to hear that you are
being audited by the House of Commons after a complaint [...].
I am happy to confirm that in the
years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 you paid me in cash when
we saw each other sums averaging 500 for all the bits and
piece of work translating, analysing French and international
labor politics that you asked me to ahead of your regular visits
to France and on the French media to discuss UK and European politics.
I can also confirm that you paid me US$950 to read and edit your
manuscript of the work on antisemitism arising from the Commission
of Inquiry into Antisemitism you chaired on behalf of the UK Parliament.
You also kindly bought me dinners or lunch (though I have no idea
of their cost) and I value our collaboration together.
As a retired US citizen of Belgian
extraction living in France I have enjoyed working with you and
the modest honorariums you have paid have been useful though the
pleasure in our collaboration has been the more important aspect.
[...] as someone who has worked so hard to promote good understanding
of European and international labor work as well as your vital
Parliamentary work on anti-semitism I am concerned that you are
under any kind of pressure and I willingly make this attestation
which I am happy to swear with a Notary if that is necessary.
23 December 2009
21. Enclosure
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's letter of 11 January 2010: E-mail
from a remunerated EPI collaborator (3), 2 January 2010
(Approximate translation of e-mail sent in German)
I hereby confirm that, in each of the years 2006
and 2007, I received from Mr Denis MacShane 300 Euros for the
translation of several texts. The fees arose in connection with
the parliamentary work of Denis MacShane. In addition, in 2007
I received 100 euros for communicating with counterparts within
the scope of IG Metall[308]
and the Frankfurt Book Fair.
The total amount of fees amounted to 700 euros.
2 January 2010
22. Enclosure
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's letter of 11 January 2010: E-mail
from a remunerated EPI collaborator (4), 10 January 2010
I am happy to confirm that you
visited Madrid more than once during the period 2006-08.
During these trips, in pursuance
of your parliamentary duties and the work of the European Policy
Institute, you met local politicians advisers to the Government
in Spain and journalists. I helped with some of the organisation
but the costs including meals for the guests and travel were all
met by the EPI. I would estimate these expenses to be at least
500.
10 January 2010
23. Enclosure
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's letter of 11 January 2010: E-mail
from an EPI contact (1), 29 November 2009
Very sorry to learn that the BNP
is attacking you in the run-up to the election. I'm not at all
surprised that the far right would seek to grab on to whatever
they can to stir up headlines and use the Parliamentary procedures
to make life difficult.
Here in the States truth is an
absolute defense, so would think all the political claims fade
as you bring forward the facts to the proper people.
I know for myself, as a lifelong
American trade unionist and labor rights campaigner, your European
Policy Institute work has had great value.
Your visits to the US and the briefings
you've provided under EPI auspices have helped keep us better
informed on trade union developments not only in the UK, but also
across Europe. In the old days, of course, unions got a lot of
attention from the policy community, academics, and the media.
But that's diminished, so your updates for those of us on this
side of the pond have been very valuable.
I hope the current climate won't
diminish your ability through EPI to keep updating us on European
trade union issues...I'm still hard at work on the campaigns to
win freedom for jailed worker activists in
China, Burma, and elsewhere, so info on developments there always
is useful.
Just wish such human rights work
wasn't necessary, but as you and EPI know many of those workers
and union activists live in a very harsh world. I'm particularly
focused on [name] in Burma at the moment....been jailed since
1997 by the regime there and not in good shape.
So just wanted to send an encouraging
word in the midst of the current attacks.
29 November 2009
24. Enclosure
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's letter of 11 January 2010: E-mail
from an EPI contact (2), 8 December 2009
In thanking you for your attendance and stressing
how useful we find it to work with you and the European Policy
Institute, I wanted to pass on some of the compliments on your
analyses of European politics and policies we received from the
corporate leaders who attended our CEO Retreat at [...].
"Magisterial" and "masterly"
and "extraordinarily well-informed" were just three
phrases that stood out from comments on your interventions that
came in the reviews of the event.
We hope to see you again next June at [our] next
CEO Retreat in [...], where EU-Russia relations will be a major
theme. Once again, I am confident that the EPI's ability to blend
geo-political, economic and European policy perspectives will
be of great benefit to our members.
8 December 2009
25. Enclosure
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's letter of 11 January 2010: Note
from an EPI contact (3), undated
I'm just getting to that time of year when I start
planning for the next term in [...] ( I leave January 4th) and
I am wondering how we can build on last year's very successful
visit both for the European Policy Institute and yourself. Is
there any EPI business bringing you to Washington or indeed anywhere
on the East Coast between the New Year and April? I could start
working on dates if there is. If not let's have a chat with what
would suit best both in terms of your and the EPI's priorities.
26. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 20 January
2010
One of the Spanish researchers/translators I paid
using EPI money claimed for my parliamentary work has now sent
me this note confirming I paid her 500.[309]
She is [name] who works for a major Spanish agency [...]. [Name]
interned for me when she was doing a LSE Masters and upon her
return to Spain I used her for the services I claimed payment
for. She was reluctant to have her name used because like others
she does not want to be involved in any publicity but has kindly
agreed to send this declaration.
A quick translation reads: "Some
lines to express appreciation of your work over the last four
years in different fora we have provided in Madrid to defend Europe
which is necessary and which few other politicians undertake and
to which you dedicate time and resources. I appreciate that you
have allowed me to collaborate in the Tertualias (UK-Spain Parliamentary
annual event) and the money you have paid me (500 Euros)."
20 January 2010
27. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 21 January
2010
Thank you for your further letter of 20 January with
the email of the same date from your Spanish colleague.[310]
I was grateful for this. I will consider it along
with your previous letter. I note that you paid this colleague
500 for collaborating in the UK-Spain parliamentary annual
event. It is not clear from this what services she provided for
this sum or the date of the paymentbut if you had both
pieces of information, that would be helpful too. I would expect
to identify the name of your collaborator in any publication of
the evidence which I have received in the course of this inquiry,
but if there is a problem with that, please let me know, together
with the reasons.[311]
Thank you again for your help with this.
21 January 2010
28. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 23 January
2010
Thank you for your letter of 21 January.[312]
I don't think [name] would have any objections to having her name
published if this is necessary. The 500 I paid her was as
her note says was for translations as claimed for via the EPI
claim against the IEP. Her letter thanks me for allowing her to
be involved or collaborate in the preparation of the Tertulias
but the payment refers to translation work.
23 January 2010
29. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 25 January
2010
This is just to thank you for your letter of 23 January
responding to mine of 21 January with the email from your Spanish
colleague.[313]
I was grateful for confirmation that this was payment
for translation work. I asked also about the date; I presume you
have no further information to help on that.
As I said in my previous letter, I am considering
the evidence you have provided and will be back in touch when
I have completed my considerations.
25 January 2010
30. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 10 February
2010
I have spent a considerable amount of time reviewing
the correspondence that we have exchanged over the last eight
months and I just wanted to take this opportunity to thank you
and your staff for the way in which you have conducted your enquiries
in relation to the complaint brought against me by [...] Mr Barnbrook.
Your conduct and that of your staff has been even handed and exemplary
and very fair when I had a difficult period [...].
Obtaining documentary evidence for the time frame
covered by the complaint has presented me with a number of challenges;
it is now very clear to me that my record keeping was totally
inadequate and that the management of my financial administration
was simply inept. My failure to deal well with my own affairs
at that time were undoubtedly compounded by my personal and professional
circumstances which were particularly distressing, [...].
Upon reflection I can now see quite clearly that
with respect to my expenses claims and the reasons for them I
could have achieved some of the same aims, in terms of acquiring
information to enable me to support my activities as a parliamentarian
with considerable expertise in relation to European affairs, if
I had simply used the administrative vehicles which were available
to all Members of Parliament at the time or discussed with the
Fees Office systems to allow me to research and travel in Europe,
and I chastise myself every day for failing to do this.
I have considered how my actions could be regarded
by others, and I could well understand that consideration of just
the facts could lead to individuals being highly critical but
I did not intend a wrong. In mitigation I can only say that the
adequacy of my judgements and the paucity of my administration
at the time were very influenced my personal circumstances. My
view is that given these facts, and my duty in respect to those
who would pass judgement on me it is now only right and proper
to repay the sums in question at this time and I enclose a cheque
accordingly based on the total amounts claimed minus the invoices
I have submitted from collaborators who worked for me.
This complaint has given me an opportunity to reflect
on what was a very difficult time and to put into place administrative
procedures which reflect best practice. I await your report, I
thank you once again for your careful consideration.
10 February 2010
31. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 11 February
2010
Thank you for your letter of 10 February with which
you enclose a cheque for £7,500 made payable to the House
of Commons Administration in respect of your claims for work undertaken
by the European Policy Institute.[314]
I am writing now just to acknowledge your letter
and to let you know that I am forwarding your cheque, with a copy
of your letter, to the House authorities. I have, as you know,
been considering carefully your letter of 11 January[315]
and I will now add to that consideration what you say in your
latest letter. I will write to you more fully when I have considered
what you have said and how best to take this matter forward.
Thank you again for writing.
11 February 2010
32. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 18 February
2010
Thank you for your letter of 11 January[316]
responding to mine of 10 and 23 November[317]
about this complaint about your claims against the Incidental
Expenses Provision from 2004-05 to 2008-09 in respect of both
EPI and computers.
I was grateful too for your letters of 20 January[318]
and 23 January[319]
and for the enclosed email[320]
from your Spanish colleague, [name], in respect of a payment to
her for 500 to add to the evidence of payments set out in
your letter of 11 January.[321]
I have also carefully considered your letter of 10 February with
which you enclosed a cheque to the House of Commons Administration
for £7,500.
I was grateful for your letters and recognise the
considerable thought you have given to these matters. As you recognise,
I do need to have an understanding of the circumstances on which
you made your claims in respect of EPI and for your computers.
In view of the complexity, I think it would be helpful
if I again attempted to summarise what you have told me. That
should assist the Department of Resources in advising me on this
matter. First, in respect of the 19 claims identified for the
work of the European Policy Institute from 2004-05 to 2007-08,
I attach a revised version of the payments schedule which takes
account of the information you have sent me about the receipt
of certain of your payments. In summary:
1. The EPI is a loose network of like minded individuals
and academics. It has no formal structure and no separate financial
structure. You control its bank account.
2. In respect of your allowance claims, you had used
the name of the Institute to enable you to claim for a range of
services and activities, namely: your own travel and accommodation;
the purchase by you of books and periodicals; your own research;
research papers and translation work commissioned by you and paid
for in cash and kind (namely meals); reading and editing the manuscript
arising from the Committee of Inquiry into Anti-Semitism; and
hospitality and travel costs for EPI contacts, including other
politicians, advisers and journalists.
3. There is no contemporary record of any of these
payments, although five of your contacts have written now with
evidence about receiving some of these payments, which were all
in cash.
4. You considered that it was desirable for you to
claim against your Incidental Expenses Provision for these costs
since you had been asked to undertake the work by the Prime Minister;
it enabled you to pursue your wider European interests; there
is no separate provision for such activities; and while you claimed
the European Travel Allowance on occasions, it was limited to
three trips to European institutions and agencies each year.
5. The claims forms you submitted stated that they
were for research and translation services they did not
refer to the other costs which were covered by these claims.
6. Neither you nor your contacts have records which
would enable you confidently to link your claims to specific payments
made via the EPI.
I would be grateful if you would confirm or amend
this summary.
Once I am clear about the facts, I would propose
to consult the Department of Resources before deciding on how
best this matter can be resolved. The question I have to resolve
is whether you were in breach of the rules of the House in making
these claims. You now consider that you could have achieved some
of the same aims in supporting your parliamentary interests in
European affairs other than making these claims; you recognize
your claims have left you open to criticism, and you have voluntarily
made a repayment of £7,500 representing the full sum of your
claims for the EPI [£12,900] less, I assume, £5,400,
representing the cash payments made to five of your colleagues
and confirmed by them.[322]
In relation to the nine computers you bought from
2004-05 to 2007-08, I attach a summary of the evidence which you
have given me.[323]
I should be grateful if you could confirm its accuracy, particularly
in relation to your first purchase, where the claim refers to
an Asus M5 and your evidence says it was a Sony Vaio. You have
also stated that all these computers were necessary for the performance
of the parliamentary duties of you and your staff. The two Sony
Vaio's which you believe you bought over this period broke down
and you have now replaced them with a third (as I understand it).
It is not clear whether you still have the computers bought over
this period. You cannot now at this remove identify whether any
of the computers you now have in your main home and your constituency
home, and which have been issued to your staff, are the computers
bought over this period or are replacement computers. You bought
these additional computers because you were not satisfied with
the quality of the computers provided free of charge by the Parliamentary
ICT service.
It would be very helpful if you could confirm this
summary of your evidence within the next week. I will then consider
the next steps. I am grateful for your help in this matter.
33. Enclosure
to the Commissioner's letter of 18 February 2010: Final revised
summaries of EPI payments and computer purchases
Payments to the European Policy Institute claimed
by Rt Hon Denis MacShane from the IEP
Date | Sum claimed from IEP
| Explanation given |
2004-05
| | |
19.12.04 | £650.00 | Final months of 2004: "trip to Madrid and a hotel stay, plus purchase of books and meetings with policy specialists and Spanish parliamentarians. The costs were met from the EPI."
|
22.1.05 | £850.00 | January 2005: Trip to Geneva "using EPI for reimbursement"; report from [name] costing CHF 500.
|
10.3.05
| £850.00
| Spring 2005: "I have used the EPI to pay informally for research and translation... flight and hotel costs" in the spring of 2005, connected with visit to Warsaw. "I asked my network of correspondents to prepare reports on how Britain was seen from the point of view of various European countries....The EPI produced an analysis in different languages as well as a report under my name on the position of Labour's sister parties in the EU."
|
28.3.05
| £550.00
| |
1.4.05 | £750.00 |
|
11.7.05 | £750.00 | Summer 2005: "I bought a considerable number of newspapers, magazines and books ... which I used EPI payments to cover. I had research undertaken in different capitals on how they would react to the No from the French and Dutch."
|
Evidence from collaborators:
|
2005 | | "I am happy to confirm that in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 you paid me in cash when we saw each other sums averaging 500 for all the bits and pieces of work - translating, analysing French and international labor politics that you asked me to ahead of your regular visits to France and on the French media to discuss UK and European politics." Letter of 23 December from [name][324]
|
2005 | | "I confirm that in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 you have paid me in cash CHF 400 each year ... for translation and help with research on political developments in Switzerland." Letter of 22 December from [name][325]
|
2005-06
| | |
05.08.05
| £500.00
| See entry for 11.7.05
|
12.10.05 | £450.00 | Autumn 2005: "The Prime Minister asked me to be his envoy to European political parties and personalities ... I could not have undertaken this intense level of work in which up to date knowledge of EU developments and European political affairs (much of it available only in languages which needed translating) without being able to call on the modest sums claimable via the EPI."
|
9.12.05 | £550.00 | One trip to Paris "to talk to editors and French opinion makers about crisis over EU budget". Cost about £350 return plus £20-30 for taxis, and possible hotel costs of 120. One trip to meet editor of Le Monde; travel costs only.
|
30.01.06 | £550.00 | 2006 "The work as a personal envoy for the PM continued throughout the year." In the first months of 2006 I went to Switzerland twice ... I went to Paris... being informed, briefed and up to date on European political and defence/security matters required intensive research, briefing and translation.
|
Evidence from collaborators:
|
2006
| | "I am happy to confirm that in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 you paid me in cash when we saw each other sums averaging 500 for all the bits and pieces of work - translating, analysing French and international labor politics that you asked me to ahead of your regular visits to France and on the French media to discuss UK and European politics." Letter of 23 December from [name][326]
|
2006
| | "I confirm that in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 you have paid me in cash CHF 400 each year ... for translation and help with research on political developments in Switzerland." Letter of 22 December from [name][327]
|
2006
| | "I hereby confirm that in each of the years 2006 and 2007 I received from Mr Denis MacShane 300 Euros for the translation of various texts. The fees arose in connection with the parliamentary work of Denis MacShane.." Statement of 2 January 2010 from [name][328]
|
2006
| | "... you visited Madrid more than once during the period 2006-08... during these trips you met local politicians advisers to the government in Spain and journalists. The costs including meals for the guests and travel were all met by the EPI. I would estimate these expenses to be at least 500." Email of 10 January 2010 from [name][329]
|
2006-07 | |
|
13.6.06
| £750.00 | "In March 2006 I went to Berlin I met diplomats and editors and bought 100 worth of books ... Again I used EPI claimed for money to help cover the costs of these trips... I used EPI money claimed in 2006 to help defray costs and to have translations done and buy books in French and German on anti-Semitism."
|
15.9.06
| £750.00 | "I was chairing the All-Party commission of Enquiry into Anti-Semitism. The autumn of 2006 saw travel to Italy, Bulgaria, Hungary, the Czech Republic and to Berlin to speak on my Commission's report on anti-Semitism. The EPI payments recorded in September, October and November of 2006 helped to cover these costs as well as helping with translation into and from different European languages."
|
19.10.06
| £950.00
| See entry for 15.9.06 above
|
8.11.06
| £550.00 | See entry for 15.9.06 above
|
29.11.06
| £850.00
| See entry for 15.9.06 above
|
19.1.07
| £550.00 | "2007 was more or less the same as the previous two years and two succeeding years in terms of regular visits to different parts of Europe, the purchase of journals and books and organising translations. I was now working actively on combating anti-Semitism at the European level, meeting politicians and researchers on this issue and reading widely which involved buying books which I used money claimed under the EPI heading to pay for."
|
Evidence from collaborators_:
|
2006?
| | "You paid me US$950 to read and edit your manuscript of the work on anti-Semitism arising from the Commission of Inquiry into Anti-Semitism you chaired on behalf of the UK Parliament." Letter of December 23 from [name][330]
|
2007
| | "I am happy to confirm that in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 you paid me in cash when we saw each other sums averaging 500 for all the bits and pieces of work - translating, analysing French and international labor politics that you asked me to ahead of your regular visits to France and on the French media to discuss UK and European politics." Letter of 23 December from [name][331]
|
2007
| | "I confirm that in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 you have paid me in cash CHF 400 each year ... for translation and help with research on political developments in Switzerland." Letter of 22 December from [name][332]
|
2007
| | "I hereby confirm that in each of the years 2006 and 2007 I received from Mr Denis MacShane 300 Euros for the translation of various texts. The fees arose in connection with the parliamentary work of Denis MacShane. In addition, in 2007 I received 100 Euros for communication with counterparts within the scope of the [Industrial Union of Metalworkers] and the Frankfurt Book Fair. The total amount of fees amounted to 700 Euros." Statement of 2 January 2010 from [name][333]
|
2007
| | "... you visited Madrid more than once during the period 2006-08... during these trips you met local politicians advisers to the government in Spain and journalists. The costs including meals for the guests and travel were all met by the EPI. I would estimate these expenses to be at least 500." Email of 10 January 2010 from [name][334]
|
2007-08
| | |
| | 2007: "I was by now actively researching contemporary European anti-Semitism which involved visits to Frankfurt and Grenoble. I was invited by Jacques Delors to join a committee to draw up a short list for the European Book of the Year... there were no funds to cover the costs of travel and staying in Paris for these meetings ... I thought it reasonable to use EPI money to cover these costs."
|
30.10.07
| £850.00
| |
| £550.00
| "This covers two tripsone to Berlin to keep in touch with political and parliamentary colleagues there. As I recall I went on a fairly cheap flight around the £150 mark but also bought books and informed myself on the German approach to the Lisbon Treaty. On 18 November I made a trip to Paris to interview a set of possible replacement PAs for my parliamentary office. I also paid 100 in cash to EPI collaborator."
|
| |
|
29.11.07
| | |
| | "This covered a pre-Christmas trip to Warsaw to meet EPI collaborators... and hold meetings with Gazeta Wyborcza editor... I paid [a collaborator] 200 and bought [the other] a very large dinner. Again I sought the cheapest possible airfare and stayed with the UK ambassador. The total amount spent was in excess of £600."
|
04.01.08
| £650.00
| |
Evidence from collaborators:
|
| | "I am happy to confirm that in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 you paid me in cash when we saw each other sums averaging 500 for all the bits and pieces of work - translating, analysing French and international labor politics that you asked me to ahead of your regular visits to France and on the French media to discuss UK and European politics." Letter of 23 December from [name][335]
|
| |
|
2008
| | |
| | "I confirm that in the years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 you have paid me in cash CHF 400 each year ... for translation and help with research on political developments in Switzerland." Letter of 22 December from [name][336]
|
2008
| | |
| | "... you visited Madrid more than once during the period 2006-08... during these trips you met local politicians advisers to the government in Spain and journalists. The costs including meals for the guests and travel were all met by the EPI. I would estimate these expenses to be at least 500." Email of 10 January 2010 from [name][337]
|
2008
| | |
No date given | |
"500 ...for translations claimed for via the EPI against the IEP". No date given. Letters of 20 and 23 January from Rt Hon Denis MacShane; also email of 20 January from [name] and letter from Mr MacShane of the same date.[338]
|
| |
|
Mr MacShane's computer purchases
| | Information from claim and supporting documentation
| Information from Mr MacShane's letter of 19 November 2009[339]
|
2004-05 | 14.3.05 | Notebook travel computer Asus M5
| lightweight Sony Vaio (laptop) bought for travel use
|
| | |
|
2005-06 | 2.11.05 | Toshiba Tecra A2 (laptop)
| computer for MP's new home |
| 28.12.05 | Fujitsu Amilo (notebook)
| 'bought for my then PA/intern' |
| 13.2.06 | constituency computer Packard Bell (desktop?)
| 'bought to replace the Sony Vaio computer which had broken down'
|
| | |
|
2006-07 | 7.12.06 | Portable computer [details redacted]
| 'bought to have a high quality computer in my study in my constituency home'
|
| | |
|
2007-08 | 5.7.07 | Laptop and programmes: Toshiba A100-02L
| 'bought for a new researcher' |
| 24.9.07 | Constituency. Laptop; office sundries. Toshiba Satellite
| 'bought for [name] my dictation typist' |
| 11.1.08 | Laptop computer: Toshiba Equium
| bought for [name], a PA/intern |
| 17.1.08 | Notebook computer: Toshiba Equium
| bought for [name], a PA/intern |
18 February 2010
34. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 25 February
2010
Thank you for your letter of 18th February which
I got on my return to Westminster after the break.[340]
I think your summary is a fair one though I suppose
the greater details and justification I provided might be adduced
in argument. But as a summary it is fair and I would like to thank
you and [an official] for the proper, courteous, patient, and
reasonable way you have handled this complaint..
On the computers I can try and find all these computers
scattered around my homes, offices and with colleagues who worked
for me. I had always thought an MP could purchase whatever equipment
he or she needed up to the IEP limit and he or she was a free
agent in terms of these purchases. I assume the Asus computer
notebook is correct though I have bought three Sonys in this period
so I assumed it was one of them.
When I came in in 1994, [a former Member], an old
friend said to me: "Denis.
You've got to see yourself as a small business. You will get no
guidance, no accounts officers, no equipment, no staff, nothing.
You have to go out and buy it and sort everything out yourself."
I may now wish that I worked as once I did for the
BBC or international organisations and whatever I wanted for myself
or my department I put in a request and got up-to-date gear.
I assumed on all these claims that if the Fees Office
thought there was anything amiss or to be questioned then they
would let me know and either I would change practice or seek their
agreement to be funded for this research work in Europe.
The BNP is making hay with their complaint as they
have always targeted me on account of my work on Europe and against
anti-Semitism. I freely concede that I wish now I had not operated
as I did. Or that I had gone and asked the Fees Office for some
arrangement to carry on my European work which has been at the
centre of my parliamentary existence over the years. Sir Paul
Kennedy has just informed that he has decided I should not pay
moneys that Sir Thomas Legg asked me to repay in his first findings.
But as with that side of the expenses story since the details
were published I still wish that MPs had been under more rigorous
controls.
In that sense, I feel more and more like a character
from Koestler's Darkness
at Noon who truly believes that what he
did was right but finds that a new dispensation obliges him to
confess guilt.
But to be honest to clear my name I am happy to pay
any amount. This process has ruined the last 9 months, allowed
endless malicious comments in the local press, and [...]. I hope
one way or another it can come to a conclusion.
25 February 2010
35. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 1 April 2010
Clearing away papers etc ahead of the election I
came across this short book published by the European Policy Institute
in 1996.[341]
It has been a constant frustration in dealing with your queries
that so many documents etc have not been logged or kept. In particular
this applies to the EPI which did produce reports and documents
steadily in the 1990s and which remains available as a mechanism
to publish reports or receive moneys for conferences and travel
though as previously indicated to you I accept my errors in respect
of claims under question.
Anyway, rather than throw some tenuous evidence that
the EPI did really exist I enclose a copy of at least one of its
publications!
1 April 2010
36. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 6 April 2010
Thank you for your letter of 1 April with a copy
of your booklet, Britain's
Steel Industry in the 21st Century, produced
in 1996.[342]
I have noted that the booklet bears the imprint:
"Epic Books is the
publishing division of The European Policy Institute, [address]."
As you say, this was in 1996. I hope that I am right
in assuming from your letter of 25 February,[343]
in which you agreed to the summary which I sent you on 18 February[344],
that the European Policy Institute no longer has the structure
implied by that imprint. In particular, it no longer has a publishing
division and no longer operates out of that or any other postal
address. The summary which I sent you on 18 February[345],
and to which you agreed, is that the EPI is now a "loose
network of likeminded individuals and academics. It has no formal
structure and no separate financial structure. You control its
bank account." If this assumption
is wrong, could you let me know straightaway?
It the meantime, I am copying your letter and mine
(but not the booklet) to the Department of Resources so that they
can take it into account in the advice which, as you will know
from my letter of 1 March, I have asked of them.
I will not be able to conclude this inquiry before
the dissolution of Parliament. I am writing to you separately
about this,[346]
but I will resume it once the new Parliament assembles on 18 May.
6 April 2010
37. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 9 April 2010
Thank you for your letter of 6 April.[347]
I don't think sending you the little book alters in any way the
basic assessment you have made. It was just very frustrating that
as a hopeless record keeper and someone who files nothing I was
unable to show you publications and reports and books that the
EPI had produced in order to demonstrate that it was not created
simply and solely to claim IEP money. So when, by chance, as I
was tidying up some long forgotten papers I came across this book
I sent it to you to show that the EPI did exist.
But I see no reason for you to alter the description
as you have set it down. I hope this is helpful.
9 April 2010
38. Letter
to the Director of Operations, Department of Resources, from the
Commissioner, 1 March 2010
I would welcome your help on a complaint which I
have received against the Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP in respect
of expenses he claimed from 2004-05 to 2008-09 from his Incidental
Expenses Provision for services provided by the European Policy
Institute and for computers.
I enclose a copy of the complainant's letter of 7
July 2009;[348]
my letter to Mr MacShane of 15 July;[349]
Mr MacShane's response of 16 July;[350]
my letter to him of 20 July;[351]
his response to me of 10 October;[352]
my letter to him of 14 October;[353]
his response of 29 October with enclosures;[354]
my letter to him of 10 November;[355]
his response of 19 November;[356]
my letter to him of 23 November;[357]
his letters to me of 11 and 20 January, 23 January and 10 February;[358]
my letter to you of 11 February;[359]
my letters to Mr MacShane of 21 January and 18 February;[360]
and his e-mail response to me of 25 February.[361]
I recognise that there is a lot of correspondence
associated with this inquiry so far. Nevertheless, I hope that
my letter of 18 February and its attachments,[362]
which have been agreed by Mr MacShane, will give you the starting
point, with supporting evidence in the previous correspondence.
I would be grateful for your comments and advice
on this complaint. In particular, it would be helpful to know
whether you consider that Mr MacShane's claims against
his Incidental Expenses Provision for research and translation
carried out by the European Policy Institute (EPI), as set out
in subparagraph 1 of my letter to him of 18 February, met the
criteria for claims against that allowance. In particular, it
would be helpful to have your advice on whether these claims were
all permissible, in the light of the information Mr MacShane has
provided, including the use of this expenditure for travel and
hotel costs by him and others, and its use in relation to the
work of the All-Party Committee of Inquiry into Anti-Semitism;
whether Mr MacShane's claims for computers over this
period were, in your view, within the rules of the House. You
will see from his letter to me of 25 February that Mr MacShane
is unable to recollect the full details of the nine computer purchases
listed by the complainant.[363]
It would therefore be helpful if you could supply unredacted copies
of the relevant claims and supporting documentation. It would
also be helpful to know whether in your view the two claims for
£498.95 in January 2008 were likely to have related to separate
machines.
Finally, I should be grateful for any other information
which the Department holds about the EPI, including details of
the type and location of its bank account. (Since the Department
appears to have made some payments direct to the EPI, I assume
that this information was held at the time.)
Any other points that you may wish to make to help
me with this inquiry would be most welcome.
I appreciate that it has taken some time to reach
this stage, but if you could let me have a response to this within
the next three weeks, I, and I know Mr MacShane, would be most
grateful.
Thank you for your help.
1 March 2010
39. Letter
to the Commissioner from the Director of Strategic Projects, Department
of Resources, 29 April 2010
Thank you for your letter to the former Director
of Operations of 1st March,[364]
and your letters to me of 6 and 12 April.[365]
May I deal with the two issues separately?
Research services
The rules governing the Incidental Expenses Provision
(IEP) allowed for claims in respect of "work
commissioned and bought in services".
This included both research and translation services.
Each of Mr MacShane's claims in respect of the European
Policy Institute (EPI) was submitted on a C2 direct payment form
(the form used in respect of claims from the IEP), with a relevant
invoice from EPI attached. On each occasion, the invoice simply
stated "Research
and translation as requested". There
is no record of any discussions between the Department and Mr
MacShane regarding either the wording of the invoices or the services
that EPI had provided. The Department relied on Members' certification
as evidence of their claims' compliance with the House's requirements.
In light of the information now provided to you by
Mr MacShane, I believe that some of the services provided were
not legitimate charges against IEP. Had the services been broken
down by type when they were submitted, then travel and accommodation
for Mr MacShane, and hospitality and travel costs for EPI contacts,
would have been queried and almost certainly disallowed. (There
was, of course, provision for extended travel which Mr MacShane
may have been able to use for some of his costs).
For completeness, I also ought to say that I take
it that the reference in your summary of 18th February[366]
to Mr MacShane's "own
research" is a reference to such
things as the purchase of materials needed for research, rather
than to any emolument paid to Mr MacShane for his own research
work. Any such emolument would not have been allowable.
The Parliamentary Committee Against Anti-Semitism
is a registered All-Party Group (APG).
It published a major Report in September 2006, which
was the subject of debate in Westminster Hall and which received
responses from the Government by means of Command Papers. Mr MacShane
chaired the Committee for its inquiry. It seems to me that work
in relation to the Committee was entirely properly work in furtherance
of parliamentary duties. There was, however, no specific guidance
about APGs and expenses before a Practice Note agreed by the Members'
Allowances Committee in early 2010 which stated that no more than
25% of the time of an employee paid out of parliamentary expenses
should be spent on APG-related activity.
I have some concerns about the work which Mr MacShane
was asked to undertake by the Prime Minister in 2005-6. If this
was work in connection with his parliamentary duties, then it
would have been an eligible expense. If, however, it was work
for party political purposes, it would not have been eligible,
and if it was work for the purposes of Her Majesty's Government,
then it might have been more appropriate for the Government to
meet the cost.
Computer costs
A list of computers purchased by Mr MacShane, together
with descriptions, is attached. I am also enclosing copies of
the unredacted claims in respect of these computers.[367]
It appears that the claims on 11 and 17 January 2008 were for
the same machine and that Mr MacShane was reimbursed twice for
the same cost.
It was not the practice of departmental staff when
validating claims for IT equipment to revisit previous claims
in order to confirm the nature and frequency of earlier, similar
purchases nor was it their practice to query whether the equipment
was necessary for a Member to carry out his or her parliamentary
duties. If such a practice had been in place at the time, I believe
that it would have been reasonable at least to have asked Mr MacShane
why this level of IT provision, in addition to that provided by
PICT, should not be have been regarded as excessive.
I can confirm that the Department has no record of
any correspondence or other communication with Mr MacShane about
his computers.
Mr MacShane says in his letter to you of 16 July
2009 that he provided computers to his paid and unpaid staff both
in the United Kingdom and abroad.[368]
So long as these computers were used only for Mr MacShane's parliamentary
purposes, and that value for money was obtained, this would seem
to me to be a proper use of allowances.
Please let me know if I can help further.
29 April 2010
Summary of Computer Purchases claimed by Rt Hon
Denis MacShane
Description (from receipt) Cost (£) Purchase
date Allowance year Further details
Notebook Travel computer 1,050 11/03/2005 04-05 "Ultaportable
laptop"
Toshiba Tecra 834.23 02/11/2005 05-06 Laptop
Siemens Portable Computer 554.96 28/12/2005 05-06 Laptop
Packard Computer 563.97 11/02/2006 05-06 Desk
top
Sony Portable computer 1,276.59 05/12/2006 06-07 Top
of range laptop
Toshiba T5300 laptop 611.12 22/06/2007 06-07 Laptop
Toshiba laptop 578.99 17/09/2007 07-08 Laptop
Toshiba laptop 498.95 31/12/2007 07-08 Laptop
29 April 2010
40. Letter
to the Director of Strategic Projects, Department of Resources,
from the Commissioner, 5 May 2010
Thank you for your letter of 29 April[369]
responding to my letters of 1 March,[370]
and of 6 and 12 April.[371]
I was most grateful for this response.
I would be very grateful if you could give me a little
more guidance about the Department's practice and policy covering
the claims which Mr MacShane made for the European Policy Institute.
As you know, Mr MacShane included in these claims the cost of
his own international travel and his accommodation abroad. It
would be helpful if you could let me know:
1. whether it was permissible at the time for Members
to claim from their Incidental Expenses Provision for the cost
of such travel and subsistence if they did so in support of their
parliamentary duties;
2. whether they could claim for such costs from their
own IEP when those costs were incurred as part of the work of
an all-party group.
Secondly, it would be helpful to know whether the
Department would have considered it acceptable at the time for
Members to meet the costs of research and translation services
by paying the providers in cash and in hospitality, without invoices
or receipts from those providers, as apparently happened in this
case.
Thirdly, you will have seen from my letter of 18
February[372]
to Mr MacShane summarising his evidence, to which he has agreed,
that the European Policy Institute would appear to be a network
of likeminded individuals and academics with no formal structure
and no separate financial structure. Its bank account would appear
to be controlled by Mr MacShane. In the light of that background,
it would be helpful to know whether the Department would consider
that the nature of EPI as now described makes it a legitimate
recipient for funding in response to claims which appear to have
been paid out to others. Could you also let me know to which bank
account the Department's payments were made in response to Mr
MacShane's EPI claims, and whether any were made to his personal
bank account?
If you could let me have a response to this letter
by 24 May, I would be most grateful.
5 May 2010
41. Letter
to the Commissioner from the Director of Strategic Projects, Department
of Resources, 13 May 2010
Thank you for your letter of 5th May.[373]
It was not permissible for Members to claim for their
own international travel and accommodation from the Incidental
Expenses Provision even when the costs were incurred in support
of their parliamentary duties. These rules applied equally when
a Member incurred such costs as part of the work of an all-party
group. (Accommodation during trips funded by extended travel could
be funded out of IEP, but not accommodation during trips funded
by European travel, for which civil service subsistence rate payments
could be claimed).
Mr MacShane submitted receipts from the European
Policy Institute (EPI). The Department would not have had any
particular difficulty with EPI paying its own suppliers in cash.
If hospitality was a form of remuneration, this would have been
unorthodox, and, had the Department known about it, it would have
raised queries. If hospitality was not remuneration, it would
not have been permitted, whether or not invoices or receipts were
provided.
If Mr MacShane had absolute control of EPI's finances,
that might have made it unwise of him to allow claims to be made
against parliamentary allowances in respect of EPI. I am, of course,
aware of Sir Thomas Legg's and Sir Paul Kennedy's views on conflicted
transactions in the ACA review, and there is an argument that
transactions with EPI were similarly conflicted. However, there
was no rule which meant that an organisation structured and controlled
as EPI was should not be a legitimate recipient of funding, and
the Department neither had nor sought information about EPI's
internal arrangements.
All EPI payments were made to the following bank
account:
Sort Code Account Number Account Name
[...] [...] European Policy
Institute
The invoice address was [address in London SW6].
No payments were made to Mr MacShane's personal bank
account.
Please let me know if I can help further.
13 May 2010
42. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 18 May 2010
Now that the new Parliament has assembled, I have
resumed work on my inquiries into this complaint. This letter
is to let you have copies of my correspondence with the Department
of Resources.
I enclose a copy of my letters to the Department
of 1 March[374]
and 6 and 12 April.[375]
I enclose also a copy of the Department's initial reply of 29
April;[376]
my letter to them of 5 May;[377]
and their response of 13 May to that letter.[378]
As you will see, the Department addressed both your
EPI claims and your claims for computers. I do not propose, however,
to ask you in this letter to respond to their views on the computer
purchases, since I am currently seeking some further information
from the House authorities about the computers which were available
to you, and I will come back to you on the computer purchases
when I receive their response.
In respect of your claims for the European Policy
Institute, you will see that, in the Department's view, some of
the services provided were not legitimate claims against the IEP.
In particular, it was not within the rules for you to have claimed
for travel and subsistence from the EPI on your own behalf or
when you were acting as part of an all-party parliamentary group.
In the Department's view, it would have been acceptable for EPI
to have paid its researchers in cash. It would not have been acceptable
for you to have claimed for hospitality unless it was remuneration
for services rendered, and, even then, they would have raised
questions with you had they known about it. The Department note
that if, as I understand to be the position, you had absolute
control of the EPI's finances, and allowed claims to be made against
parliamentary allowances in respect of the EPI, such transactions
might have been unwise. There is also an argument that such transactions
were conflicted. The Department note, however, that in their view
there was no rule that meant that an organisation structured and
controlled as was EPI should not have been a legitimate recipient
of funding.
I will need myself to come to a view on these matters,
including whether your claims on behalf of EPI met the Speaker's
injunction that Members' use of allowances should be above reproach.
I would, therefore, welcome your comments on the
Department's advice. It would be helpful also, in the light of
that advice, if you could help me on the following three points:
Was the hospitality you gave part of the remuneration
of those who provided you with research and translation services?
If so, can you explain whether the arrangement was agreed in advance,
and how you identified the value of the hospitality to be offered?
When you provided that hospitality, did you meet
the cost of your own meals out of the funds you claimed from the
EPI, or did you pay separately for your own food and any drink?
Given your evidence that the EPI did not have an
office or structure during the period covered by this inquiry,
could you help me on who was at the Hammersmith address ([address]
from which the invoices were sent; and who raised and authorised
each of the invoices?
I will be back in touch again to consult you about
the computer matters, but I would be very grateful if you could
let me have a response to this letter within the next two weeks.
I am hopeful that, subject to your reply and clearing up any points
on the computers, it will be possible then for me to bring this
inquiry to a resolution. I am grateful for your continued help
with this.
18 May 2010
43. Letter
to the Director of Operations and Member Services, Parliamentary
ICT Service, from the Commissioner, 11 May 2010
I would welcome your help on a complaint which I
have received against the Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP in respect
of expenses he claimed from his Incidental Expenses Provision
to buy computers.
I would be very grateful if you would let me have
details of any computers which Mr MacShane borrowed or purchased
from the House during the period covered by the complaint, which
is from 2004-05 to 2008-09. If you had any other relevant information,
including information about any computers held or used by Mr MacShane
at the opening of this period, that would also be most welcome.
If it were possible to let me have a reply by the
end of the month, I should be very grateful. Thank you for your
help.
11 May 2010
44. E-mail
to the Commissioner from the Director of Operations and Member
Services, Parliamentary ICT Service, 18 May 2010
You wrote to me asking of the IT records relating
to the Mr MacShane. Please find these attached.[379]
If I can be of any further assistance please ask.
18 May 2010
45. Enclosure
to the Director of Operations and Member Services, Parliamentary
ICT Service's e-mail of 18 May 2010: Extract from Rt Hon Denis
MacShane MP's IT records
Order date | Equipment type
| Model | Location
|
23 June 2006 | Laptop
| D610 | Westminster
|
23 June 2006 | Printer
| 5110cn | Constituency
|
23 June 2006 | PC
| GX520 | Constituency
|
23 June 2006 | Monitor
| 1704FPT | Constituency
|
23 June 2006 | Laptop
| D610 | Constituency
|
23 June 2006 | Printer
| 5110cn | Westminster
|
23 June 2006 | PC
| GX520 | Westminster
|
23 June 2006 | Monitor
| 1704FPT | Westminster
|
23 June 2006 | Laptop
| D610 | Westminster
|
25 July 2006 | PC
| GX520 | Westminster
|
25 July 2006 | Monitor
| 1707FPT | Westminster
|
Parliamentary ICT
May 2010
46. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 20 May 2010
When I wrote to you on 18 May[380]
I said that I had asked the House authorities for information
about the computers which were available to you in the period
covered by the complaint, and that I would write to you again
when I received their response.
I have now received that information. I enclose a
copy of my letter of 11 May to the Director of Operations and
Member Services in the Parliamentary ICT service,[381]
his emailed response of 18 May, together with a list of the centrally-provided
computer equipment which you received in 2006,[382]
a further copy of my letter of 1 March to the Department of Resources,[383]
and their response of 29 April with your unredacted claims for
computers in the years from 2004-05 to 2007-08.[384]
I enclose a schedule[385]
which summarises your computer provision from both PICT and IEP.
As you will see, it shows that you received 14 computers from
2004-05 to 2007-08. The computers seem to have been allocated
as follows:
- constituencysix computers provided between
February 2006 and September 2007, namely two PCs and four laptops;
- Westminsterfour computers provided in
June and July 2006, namely two PCs and two laptops;
- unspecifiedtwo notebooks bought in March
and December 2005: one laptop (for "new home") in November
2005 and a further laptop bought in December 2007.
You said in your letter of 10 October that two lightweight
travel computers broke down and had to be replaced.[386]
It seems that, according to your evidence, one was replaced by
a PC bought in February 2006 (although there is no record of it
being, as suggested in the list attached to your letter of 29
October, a Sony Vaio). You have not identified which other laptop
broke and was replaced. In any event, taking account of the two
breakages, it would seem that you had available at any one time
over the period up to 12 computers (four PCs and eight laptops/notebooks)broadly
spread between six computers in your constituency, four in Westminster
and two for travelling.
In the light of this, I would be grateful if you
could:
1. confirm or revise this summary of the purchase
and use of your computers;
2. let me know how many parliamentary staff you
employed at any one time from 2004-05 to 2007-08, divided between
Westminster and your constituency;
3. confirm that each member of staff, including
interns, passed on their computer to any successor when they left
your office;
4. confirm that the Sony laptop you bought VAT-free
in Heathrow on 5 December 2006 returned with you to your constituency
home, as suggested in your letter of 29 October;[387]
5. let me know whether you accept that you claimed
twice for the £498.95 Toshiba laptop which you bought in
Fulham on 31 December 2007, and, if so, how this mistake occurred.
In the light of your response, I will need to consider
whether the computers you bought in addition to the PICT provision
you ordered were costs which were wholly, exclusively and necessarily
incurred in your Parliamentary duties.
It would be most helpful to have a response to this
letter by 9 June.
20 May 2010
47. Consolidated
summary of Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP's computer acquisitions, 20
May 2010
Rt Hon Denis MacShane: computer acquisitions
| |
|
Financial year | Cost
| Date of claim | Information from claim and supporting documentation (or, for centrally provided computers, from PICT)
| Information from Member's letter of 29.10.09 (where applicable)
| Destination (from claim and supporting documentation - or, for centrally provided computers, from PICT)
| Other comments |
2004-05 | £1,050.00
| 14.3.05 | Notebook travel computer Asus M5
| 'lightweight Sony Vaio (laptop) bought for travel use'
| Not specified | Bought in Tottenham Ct Road and claimed against IEP
|
| |
| | |
| |
2005-06 | £834.23
| 2.11.05 | Toshiba Tecra A2 (laptop)
| computer for MP's new home | Member's home
| 1 yr warranty. Bought in New Oxford St and claimed against IEP
|
| £554.96 |
28.12.05 | Fujitsu amilo (notebook)
| 'bought for my then PA/intern, [name]' |
Not specified | Bought in Fulham and claimed against IEP
|
| £563.97 |
13.2.06 | constituency computer Packard Bell (desktop)
| 'bought to replace the Sony Vaio computer which had broken down'
| Constituency | Bought in Meadowhall and claimed against IEP
|
| |
| | |
| |
2006-07 | | 23.6.06
| Laptop | n/a | Westminster
| Centrally provided |
| | 23.6.06
| PC | n/a | Constituency
| Centrally provided |
| | 23.6.06
| Laptop | n/a | Constituency
| Centrally provided |
| | 23.6.06
| PC | n/a | Westminster
| Centrally provided |
| | 23.6.06
| Laptop | n/a | Westminster
| Centrally provided |
| | 25.7.06
| PC | n/a | Westminster
| Centrally provided |
| £1,276.59
| 7.12.06 | port.computer Sony TX3HP 1300
| 'bought to have a high quality computer in my study in my constituency home'
| Member's constituency home | Bought in Heathrow and claimed against IEP
|
| |
| | |
| |
2007-08 | £611.12
| 5.7.07 | Constit.laptop and programmes: Toshiba A100-02L
| 'bought for a new researcher', [name] |
Constituency | Bought in London? and claimed against IEP
|
| £578.99 |
24.9.07 | constit. Laptop; office sundries. Toshiba Satellite
| 'bought for
my dictation typist' |
Constituency | Bought in Rotherham and claimed against IEP. Also bought dictation machine
|
| £498.95 |
11.1.08 | Laptop computer: Toshiba Equium
| 'bought for ...a PA/intern, [name]' | Not specified
| Bought in Fulham and claimed against IEP |
| £498.95 |
17.1.08 | Notebook computer: Toshiba Equium
| 'bought for ...a PA/intern, [name]' | Not specified
| Bought in Fulham and claimed against IEP. DOR believes this was duplicate claim.
|
Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards
20 May 2010
48. Letter
to the Director of Strategic Projects, Department of Resources,
from the Commissioner, 17 May 2010
Thank you for your letter of 13 May[388]
responding to mine of 5 May[389]
seeking further advice on this complaint against Mr Denis MacShane
MP.
I was most grateful for this response. I will be
showing our correspondence to Mr MacShane and inviting his comments
on it. In the meantime, it would be very helpful if you could
let me have the unredacted copies of the relevant claim forms
and invoices from 2004-05 to 2007-08.
Thank you for your help.
17 May 2010
49. Redacted
example of an EPI invoice, dated 11 July 2005, from the 19 invoices
provided by the Director of Strategic Projects on 25 May 2010
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
50. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 27 May 2010
I wrote to you on 18 May to show you the advice I
had received from the Department of Resources in respect of claims
which are the subject of this complaint and asked some questions
in relation to the EPI from that advice.[390]
I wrote to you separately on 20 May about your computer claims.[391]
I am writing to you now because, following the Department's
letter to me of 13 May, [392]
I asked them to send me the unredacted invoices for your EPI claims
in 2005 and 2006.[393]
I attach a copy of my letter to them of 17 May[394]
and the Department's response of 25 May with the relevant claims
and invoices.[395]
As you will see, the invoices are all presented for
work on: "research and translation," although one invoice
describes the work as "research and communications work"
and another as "research and translation consultancy."
Work is described either as "as agreed" or "as
requested." As well as the office address referred to in
the Department's response, the invoices are all presented and
signed [name]. The invoice footer identifies [name] as the General
Manager. It identifies [name] as Acting Director and identifies
four Associate Directors one in Geneva, two in Washington and
one without a location. You enclosed correspondence from three
of these with your letter to me of 11 January.[396]
I am having some difficulty in reconciling the information
on the invoices with the information which you have so far provided.
You had agreed as a summary of your evidence that EPI had no formal
structure, no separate financial structure and that you controlled
its bank account (my letter to you of 18 February[397]
confirmed by your letter to me of 25 February[398]).
The invoices, however, suggest that as well as an office address,
there was a General Manager who was responsible for signing the
invoices, an Acting Director, and four Associate Directors. Could
you help me on the role, responsibilities, and identities of the
General Manager, Acting Director and Associate Directors identified
on the invoices? Could you also give me the current postal addresses
of the General Manager and the Acting Director so that I can take
evidence from them about the work of the EPI and, in particular,
about the invoices which the General Manager presented to you?
Finally, it would be helpful to know for how long EPI has been
based at these premises, and whether they were a business address
of your brother, as suggested in your letter to me of 29 October.[399]
You may wish to respond to this letter at the same
time you respond to my letter of 18 May.[400]
If so, I would be grateful if you could let me have a response
by 9 June. Thank you for your help.
27 May 2010
51. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 15 June 2010
Thank you for your letters of 18th, 20th and 27th
May.[401]
I am sorry to be late in replying but I have been on the road
a great deal of time and setting up new office arrangements here
and in the constituency have taken a great deal of time.
I hope the letter below answers your queries on both
the EPI and computers in as much as I can respond to your detailed
questions. As have previously written to you I accept that errors
were made but they were mistakes based on an over-enthusiastic
zeal to carry out my parliamentary work on European affairs.
EPI
As you yourself wrote to me on 18th February "The
EPI is a loose network ...It has no formal structure and no separate
financial structures. You control the bank account."[402]
That is the case. The letterheads used to claim for
reimbursement which as I have argued I believed were legitimate
in order to carry out or commission research in the fields of
parliamentary work in which I specialise (though as my letter
of 10 February 2010 made clear I now accept that my approach is
indeed open to question and reproach) date back from the 1990s
when I was working in Geneva and set up the EPI. The names at
the bottom of the letterhead were friends and associates at the
time. The titles were simply on the letterhead to make it look
more official. At the time I asked my brother if I could use a
business address of his though any payments were made by BACS
so the address fell into disuse. There is no office nor has there
ever been any employed salaried staff. I have never been to the
address [...].
As I stressed in previous letters and when we met
[my brother] has no involvement in, responsibility for, payments
from or is in any way connected to the EPI. He was extremely concerned,
as was I, at the Mail on Sunday on Sunday story and the
efforts by the paper's reporters to approach him and his family
in their usual intrusive manner. [...] he is rightly anxious not
to be linked in any way to this inquiry. [...] but I repeat as
I made clear in letters to you and in an informal meeting as well
as over the phone the EPI did not involve him in any way.
As previously explained I used the EPI as a means
to recoup expenses that I paid out for the research I carried
out by travelling in Europe to sustain my parliamentary work on
European issues. As I wrote in The Times on last Friday
"To be on top of what is going on in Europe, I go there a
lot. One visit and talk to European politicians is worth reading
a dozen articles back in London. So, of late, I have been in Paris,
Riga, Cracow. Naples, Madrid and Brussels for brief in-and-out
trips."
Thus on my travels to carry out research I would
have paid for a drink, a coffee or the odd meal for people I met
for the purposes of continually updating my parliamentary knowledge
on European affairs. As I have told you in the past I have no
detailed invoices such as you suggest in sub-para 1 of your letter
of 18th May. Nor did I make any agreement or specific arrangements
about hospitality. I visited. I met. I stayed overnight. I bought
books and magazines in foreign languages. In the UK this would
have been met by extended travel, or by sending in individual
bills for books or newspaper/magazine subscriptions.
The Fees Office always met reasonable requests in
that regard. In my interpretation of what I considered to be research
on my main area of parliamentary work and for ease of administration
I submitted EPI bills which covered what I considered to be what
I had disbursed in the period concerned. The invoices were pro-forma
on my computer with just the amount varying according to what
I judged to have expended. Again I stress my sole responsibility
based on my interpretation of the rules and my belief that carrying
out this research in Europe added value to my role as an MP specialising
in European affairs.
I discussed with [name of official], UK Representative
to the EU, last week, the decision of the then Prime Minister
to ask me to report directly to him via [name of official] on
EU politics but that there is no provision in Government to pay
anyone to do this work. "You are right on both counts. Denis.
The PM and we valued your work and information but of course we
couldn't pay anything to your costs," he said. I asked [name
of official] to send a note you to that effectwhich he
agreed to do subject to clearance from the FCO PUS.[403]
I genuinely believed that as an MP what I was doing was of value
to public service even if as I now accept and [the Director of
Strategic Projects] makes clear that I may have cut corners.
Computers
On computers I have tracked down one in Rotherham
which was not thrown away and I have brought it down to London.
There may be others gathering dust somewhere but I have never
paid much attention to matériel.
I have always just bought what was needed when it was needed within
the limits of the IEP allowances -bearing in mind I was not claiming
rent for an office in my constituency so I felt relaxed about
buying kit.
I have bought a great deal of kit - printers, mobile
phones, Palms, mobile phones, scanners, collating machines, fax
machines, cameras etc - which I have replaced, thrown away, or
stopped using as new models have come along. I had an extensive
network of interns - not employed staff - in the period when I
stopped being a minister and if they needed a cheap and cheerful
computer I just bought a new one much as I would buy any other
bit of kit that I needed for the office. They are scattered to
the four winds in America and Europe.
The computers offered by PICT quickly became out-dated
-- they had no wi-fi function for example and PICT while being
very helpful in certain regards were not able to upgrade computers
so it was easier to go to PC World and get what I needed to do
my parliamentary work.
In respect of your letter of 20 May on computers
I have no reason to object to your summary as I genuinely cannot
remember why or when I purchased any bit of office kit in the
16 years I have been an MP.[404]
I have had at any one between 3 and 5 people paid as full or part-time
staff with one dictation typist part-time in Rotherham and usually
one or two interns in my Westminster office. I had complaints
from staff about slowness of some computers especially with the
bigger programmes for case-work, web-sites, design and so forth
so just said "Let's get a new one." The 2006 Vaio was
a light-weight one that stayed with me in my brief-case until
it broke down and was not repairable. If I claimed twice for the
same computer bought 31 December 2007 that was clearly a mistake
though I am surprised the Fees Office did not notice it.
My paperwork is useless -- as I write I have piles
of papers left and right including all the post-election bills
which a kind gentleman from Ipsa will I hope help to put through
the system tomorrow when he comes to my office. I am the world's
worst keeper of bills, invoices, papers etc and am constantly
forgetting either to claim payments I am entitled to or make payments
I should pay. If you come to my office you will see you are dealing
with someone who has very poor paper organisation skills and no
book-keeping ability.
I remain conscious that I may have gone beyond what
is permitted or inferred in the previous Green Book. I have made
some rectification and am willing to make more if required. This
[...] complaint has been hanging over my head for a year now and
was turned into political capital during the election campaign.
I am anxious for it to come to a conclusion and am grateful to
you and to [name of official] for the thorough but very fair manner
with which you have conducted the inquiry. I am ready to come
for a further informal meeting if there are any points you feel
need clarification. As evidence of my continuing parliamentary
engagement in European and international matters I enclose some
recent interventions.[405]
I do so to underline that this activity is my parliamentary life
and the claims I made were not for personal gain but to discharge
my duties as I saw fit.
15 June 2010
52. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 30 June 2010
Thank you for your letter of 15 June[406]
responding to my letters to you of 18, 20 and 27 May about this
complaint.[407]
I was most grateful for this response. In respect
of EPI, I have noted that the invoices which were produced were
on old letterheads. My understanding of what you have told me
is that at the time you submitted these invoices the structure
of EPI as suggested by the notepaper was no longer extant, and
that EPI had never used the address given for the business. You
prepared the invoices using a proforma on your computer. Each
of these invoices is addressed to you and apparently submitted
by "[name]" who has signed each invoice in manuscript.
He was listed on the bottom of the invoice as General Manager.
Could you let me know who signed these invoices? And could you
give me their address so that I can take evidence from them?
In respect of the questions I asked you about the
hospitality funded by your EPI claims, I take it that the hospitality
was not a part of the remuneration offered for those who undertook
any research or translation work for you. The cost of such hospitality,
and the cost of your own meal and any drinks, was met from claims
you made through the EPI invoices for research and translation.
If this is wrong, please let me know.
Turning to your response on computers, it was helpful
to know that you are content with my summary. It would appear
that at any one time you had some four computers in Westminster
for use by yourself and between one and two interns. Would you
kindly confirm that? I take it also that when the interns left,
they took with them the laptops or notebooks which you had provided
which are now "scattered to the four winds in America and
Europe", and that the Sony laptop bought in Heathrow on 5
December 2006 travelled with you in your briefcase until it ceased
to work. If any of this is wrong, please let me know.
You have sent me a little over a hundred pages taken
from your website to illustrate your continuing interest in European
and international matters. I do not propose to enter that into
the evidence for this inquiry, but if there is any particular
item which you consider I ought to reflect in the evidence, please
let me know.
I would be very grateful if you could let me have
a response to this letter within the next two weeks. I will then
review all the evidence. At this stage I am minded to prepare
a memorandum to the Committee on Standards and Privileges on this
matter, although you should draw no inferences from that. Having
reviewed the evidence, I will come to a view on whether it would
be helpful in bringing this matter to a conclusion for us to meet
for a formal interview. I appreciate that this has taken a long
time, but I know you will recognize that it has not been altogether
straightforward to identify the facts in relation to the claims
which are the subject of this complaint. I do recognise the pressure
this has put on you and I am grateful for the help you have continued
to give me despite the difficulties with your own records.
Finally, if you wish to make any comments on the
advice given by the Department of Resources, as set out in my
letter of 18 May, they would be very welcome.[408]
30 June 2010
53. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 22 July 2010
Thank you for your two further letters. I am sorry
to be late in replying but in addition to a parliamentary trip
to the US, I have [...] That plus almost daily struggle with Ipsa
to get any payment (so far unsuccessfully) for any bills since
the election has left me behind on all correspondence.
As I have tried to explain I have been and remain
heavily involved in European political issues as my main parliamentary
speciality. [Name of former Member] once remarked that an MP who
could not get to speak at any meeting in Britain by using the
Extended Travel Scheme to cover the costs was not worthy of the
job.
Today that creative interpretation of parliamentary
expenses would be found shocking and to be condemned. I fear I
am of the [name of former Member] school. I carefully husbanded
my IEP payments principally by not charging any rent for
my constituency office so that I could use the EPI as
a vehicle to cover the costs of my European work as outlined in
some detail in previous letters.
Today it was announced that [a Member of Parliament]
would fly with the Foreign Secretary to India. I am not sure if
[name of Member] will be paying the full costs of his travel as
I was expected to cover my costs when the then Prime Minister
asked me to be his special envoy to the EU which work and travel
was covered in part by EPI claims. I was discussing this yesterday
with [a Member of Parliament] whose travel and work on Afghanistan
has led to some reshaping of HMG strategy. [Name of Member]said
he had paid £12,000 from his own pocket even though his travels
there have been poured into a series of important Commons interventions
on the issue. I also went to Afghanistan in 2008 and paid for
my own fare to Kabul even if my only reason for going there was
to be able better to contribute to Parliamentary debate as I have
done on this subject.
Thus this [...] complaint has to be set in the context
of how MPs are to undertake work which is not formally covered
by a budget line. As I have said I and I alone take full responsibility
for all payments and claims made by the EPI as a vehicle. My staff
scrawl my name for me regularly on letters and the reference to
[name] is to a similarly scrawled nom de plume. It was
once used by my brother who allowed me to use his London office
address as a kind of poste restante when the EPI was set
up in the 1990s. But as I have also said my brother has no involvement
with or knowledge of the EPI for more than a decade [...].
As I was trying to explain how I carried out my European
political and parliamentary work in the period covered I explained
that I had a network of collaborators who helped with research,
translation and networking. I either paid them specific fees some
of which have been forwarded to you or bought meals and drinks
as one would with any such group of co-workers. There is no list
of restaurant or bar receipts and since I eat and live modestly
and do not frequent expensive restaurants I doubt if it comes
to very much. I appreciate you would be more comfortable with
a detailed set of receipts etc, and with the benefit of hindsight
so would I. With the benefit of hindsight I almost certainly should
not have used the EPI as a vehicle to cover costs of working on
European affairs and with the benefit of hindsight [name of former
Member] should never have used extended travel to cover costs
of going to political meetings in the UK. But then my interest
and I hope useful Parliamentary work on Europe would not have
been able to be developed as it was after I stood down as a Minister
in 2005.
On [the Director of Strategic Projects'] comments
of course I accept them. I did not say I claimed for an All-Party
Parliamentary Group's work. I have never done so. He is confusing
this with the Parliamentary Committee of Enquiry Into Antisemitism
(not the same as an APPG) which I chaired and which reported in
2007 and then was dissolved. I have since taking a lead as an
MP speaking in the Commons and public on the scourge of neo-antisemitism
and helped set up the International Parliamentary Coalition Against
Antisemitism. Some of my travel to Europe also involved meetings
with fellow parliamentarians and others involved in this aspect
of work and I did feel it reasonable, given the way I controlled
my IEP costs, to allow EPI claims to cover some of this work.
I am also one of Parliament's strongest critics of the BNP's anti-semitic
history and ideology. I enclose an extract from a book I published
in 2008 [...] So part of all my expenses claimed in the period
under review were in connection with parliamentary work on antisemitism,
including EPI money, but they were not as [the Director of Strategic
Projects] suggests in connection with a registered APPG.
On computers as I write there are five in my office
in the Commons with others at homes in London and Rotherham and
in the constituency office. Looking through old notebooks I noticed
I had an intern from the US in 2005/06. Did I provide him with
a computer to do work? I cannot remember. Anymore than I can remember
the printers, cameras, mobile phones, photo-copiers, scanners,
TVs, furniture, and other bits and pieces of kit I bought. I am
currently seeking to replace my London home computer with one
that can do Skype (if I can get anyone from Ipsa to talk to me!)
so as to reduce bills for calls abroad. I just bought kit as and
when it was needed. [The complainant] has focussed on computers
but he might just as easily have listed every other bit of equipment
on the expense forms submitted to the Department of Resources
for the period under question. I can go and find all these computers
or equivalents and bring them to you if you really want me to.
On this as on all other aspects of this procedure I accept full
responsibility for what I spent and what I claimed. I have been
a hard-working MP with a passion for European affairs and with
no interest or ability in being an office manager. I had a variety
of researchers, interns, co-workers and simply provided them with
computers and any other kit as when it was needed to work both
in my tiny office in the Commons or elsewhere as was most appropriate.
I wish the Department of Resources had challenged any of these
claims in the period concerned and I could have had a discussion
with them. Had this happened this whole business might have been
avoided. One or two claims I submitted were rejected and I accepted
their decision as final. I have not sought to duck my responsibility
or regret that my interpretation of what could be claimed is now
under challenge and I have tried to show that with the restitution
payment I have made.
I was required by the Legg Committee to pay back
£1,300 and Sir Paul Kennedy not only upheld my appeal on
other Legg demands but wrote to me to state that I had underclaimed
certain ACA expenses. The sums other colleagues were required
to pay back are much greater than the totality of the EPI claims
all of which were submitted in connection with my parliamentary
and MP's work linked to my special interest of European affairs.
I appreciate we are all going on the August break
now but this has been hanging over my head for 15 months [...]
as I keep asking myself if I am a crook and why my work on Europe
and antisemitism requires such investigation. I accept fully there
was a conflict in the strict interpretation of what might be claimed
and I regret that. But I am not going to resile from my commitment
to what parliamentary and political work I have undertaken in
this period even if the method of being reimbursed for part of
it is open to question.
On the issue of material sent to you that was just
to show the continuing range of work on European affairs partly
covered by EPI payment. I think you have the picture now and if
this is to be considered by the new Standards and Privileges Committee
whenever it is formed. I don't doubt that colleagues there will
be aware of my commitment to and interest in European political
issues as they impact on our country.
22 July 2010
54. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 9 August 2010
Thank you for your letter of 22 July responding to
my previous correspondence.[409]
You refer to your letter as being in response to two of my letters,
but from what I can see, the outstanding letter to which yours
is the response is my letter to you of 30 June.[410]
I was most grateful for this response. It would appear
from what you say that members of your staff regularly signed
invoices on outdated EPI notepaper, not using their own name but
the name [which] appears on the notepaper as the General Manager
of EPI. The invoices purport to have been signed by [name], when
it would appear from your evidence that they were not so signed.
In the light of this, I would be grateful to know:
1. if you instructed members of your staff to
sign in this way, and if so why such instructions were given;
2. why the name of "[name]"
was used, and if there was such a person
acting as "General
Manager" of the EPI;
3. whether "[name]"
is in fact your brother, or some other
person;
4. your reasons for using notepaper which referred
to an address which you have described as having fallen "into
disuse".
I understand from your letter of 22 July[411]
and your earlier letter of 29 October 2009[412]
that your brother has never had any direct active part in the
work of EPI, whether as General Manager or anything else. His
only involvement, as I understand it, was to let you use one of
his London business addresses to receive mail.
I have noted what you say about computers. Could
you just confirm that, as suggested in my letter to you of 30
June, interns were able to take the parliamentary-funded laptops
with them, and did so, when they left your office?[413]
I appreciate that this inquiry has gone on far longer
than either of us would have wished. I am keen to bring this to
a conclusion. But you will appreciate, I am sure, the implications
of the invoices which you submitted for your EPI claims, and I
do need to explore these further before I can decide how best
to conclude my inquiry.
I recognise that we are now in the recess, and I
am sorry to hear about [...], but I hope you might let me have
a response to this letter by the end of August.
9 August 2010
55. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 14 September
2010
Thank you for your letter of 9 August and I apologise
for delays and the necessity of [name of official] to call me.[414]
[...] Indeed the nightmare of coming to terms with Ipsa and sorting
out new arrangements for so many aspects of one's life under the
new regime consumes an intense amount of time. This combined with
regular attendance in the Chamber has delayed this response. I
still cannot fully understand how the BNP can oblige part of the
parliamentary system to submit an MP to more than 15 months of
investigation which has been a cause of very great strain, [...],
and stress about my good name as a Parliamentarian active on European
affairs and in combating anti-semitism which has made me a target
[...].[415]
On your questions, I do not know if there is much
I can add to previous correspondence. Obviously I take full responsibility
for all claims made to the Fees Office. I would invite you to
come and spend time with me and see how chaotic my office and
work is as I try to keep abreast of all the demands made on my
time particularly with reference to my European parliamentary
and political work. I am not a civil servant working 9-5 in a
structured system with specialists handling finance, travel, engagement
in Europe, or personnel questions. In the period concerned I was
coping with [...] and still trying to discharge my European parliamentary/political
work as set out to you in previous communications since the BNP
sent in its complaint.[416]
I have had a flow of interns and assistants in my office. They
took charge of many aspects of my work, booking travel, sending
out invoices for payments, and helping with HoC form filling.
I have always allowed others - staff, family, etc - to sign or
pp my name. But I take responsibility.
I carefully husbanded my allowance - principally
by not charging the Commons any rent for my constituency office
- so that I would have part of the allowance to use on my European
work. I used the EPI as a convenient vehicle. Since its inception
before I became an MP. The EPI is a loose network. There is no
office, no staff, and just a post-box address. My brother is not
involved in any way [...] So please do not bring my brother into
this.
The letter-head has remained unchanged over 20 years.
[The name on the invoices] as I have previously explained is a
nom de plume used over the years to cover expense claims
and payments from the EPI. The EPI has published books, reports,
organised conferences and is used by its network as and when appropriate.
As I have explained I used the EPI to claim reimbursement from
the Fees Office. An MP is allowed extended travel to carry out
similar travel, attend conferences, carry out research, and stay
overnight in the UK but there is no equivalent system for European
work beyond three heavily circumscribed trips which I preferred
not to claim as they were always held up to press opprobrium when
published. I could have submitted all the individual payments
to EPI collaborators on individual invoices but since I was operating
within the limits of my allowance it was just easier to submit
periodic claims and use that money for reimbursement. I fully
accept that this approach is open to criticism and is part of
the overall problem of covering MPs' costs which have given rise
to all the new rules. I have sought as an indication of my acceptance
of this to repay £7,500 even though I am satisfied in my
own mind that all EPI claimed money were in pursuit of my work
as an elected parliamentarian who specialises in Europe.
On the computer question as I think I have previously
written I am happy to hunt down any computer you would like me
to return. I bought different bits of kit as and when needed.
These include computers and other more expensive pieces of electronic
and communication/printing equipment. For some reason [the complainant]
has only chosen to list the computers. So if it helps I can find
the computers you wish me to return and deliver them to your office.
I have two, possibly three new interns coming into my Parliamentary
office this month so will again be having to provide computers
etc for them. I have had no new computers from the Commons system
since 2005 and laptops etc quickly get out of date. Again I used
my allocated OCA office to buy what I needed when I needed it.
Finally, can I make clear that I always accepted
any ruling from the Fees Office which challenged any claim I made.
Had the Fees Office called me in on either EPI or computer claims
I would have explained my position but accepted their decisions.
I work very long days, weekends on my parliamentary/political/constituency
work and have never had time for precise clerical book-keeping.
I feel it is somewhat unfair to apply retrospectively today's
more rigorous (moralistic?) norms on what MPs can and cannot claim
to carry out their duties as they see them. If MPs cannot undertake
European work then our debates in the Commons given our membership
of the European Union and its influence on public policy will
be all the poorer.
14 September 2010
56. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 16 December
2010
You will recall that I wrote to you on the 10th February 2010
concerning the complaint by [...] Mr Barnbrook and your investigation
into my expenses claim.[417]
In that letter I enclosed a cheque returning the monies that I
had claimed in respect of the European Policy Institute invoice
for which I did not have supporting documentation covering the
claims.
Since then, you have continued your investigation. I have been
aware of the approach that you have adopted in relation to expenses
claims generally and your interpretation, and that of other authorities
within the House, of the application of the expenses provisions.
In hindsight, I can now see that your approach to the interpretation
of the rules is the proper one, given the recent intense scrutiny
of the expenses and allowance scheme. Although I believed (based
on advice from other senior colleagues) that I was making claims
using a system and on a basis then accepted by the Fees Office
and the House administration, I now see that the method of claiming
through the EPI invoices was inappropriate.
I am now enclosing a further cheque of £5,400, the full
cost of the European Policy Institute claims over the period and
which had been complained about.
16 December 2010
57. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 4 July 2012
I am writing to let you know that, having been informed
by the Metropolitan Police that they have decided to take no further
action in respect of their investigation, I am now resuming the
inquiry which, with the agreement of the Committee on Standards
and Privileges, I suspended following the publication of its 1st
Special Report of Session 2010-2011 on 14 October 2010. I informed
you of this in my letter to you of 12 October.[418]
I believe that it should be possible to bring this
inquiry to an early conclusion since you have provided me with
very full information during the course of my inquiry. I would
propose, therefore, to move to arranging an interview with you
so that we can discuss the issues which arise in relation to the
complaint as it affects the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament
and its associated rules, in this case the relevant Green Book
rules. I would write to you before we met to let you know more
about the procedure and the areas which I suggest we cover. Subject
to that interview, I would then prepare a memorandum on the complaint
to the Committee on Standards and Privileges. In accordance with
my normal procedure, I would show you the [factual] sections of
that memorandum for any comments you may wish to make on their
factual accuracy.
As you know, the essence of this complaint is that
the costs you claimed against the Incidental Expenses Provision
for your constituency office and certain office services and equipment
were not wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred on your
parliamentary duties, contrary to the rules of the House.
Before taking this further I think it would be right
to give you an opportunity to let me know whether you have any
additional information you wish to give me in relation to this
complaint. If you have any such information, it would be helpful
to know whether this in your view adds to or modifies the extensive
evidence you have already helpfully given me.
It would be very helpful if you could let me have
a response to this letter within the next three weeks. If it would
be helpful, I would of course be very happy to see you here at
the House to discuss further the process necessary to bring this
matter to a conclusion.
I am writing to the complainant to let him know that
I have resumed this inquiry.[419]
4 July 2012
58. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 30 July 2012
I wrote to you on 4 July to let you know that I was
resuming my inquiry into this complaint.[420]
I invited you to let me have any additional information you wished
to give me in relation to this complaint within the following
three weeks, before I brought my inquiry to a conclusion through
us meeting for an interview.
I received no response to this letter and my office,
therefore, spoke to you on 30 July. I understand that you told
my office that you were acting through your lawyer, and that your
lawyer was away on holiday and that you would soon be going on
holiday yourself. You were not able to tell my office when you
would reply to my letter.
It is, of course, open to you to seek such advice
as you feel necessary. Under the procedures agreed by the House,
however, Members are expected to respond to my inquiries for themselves
and not through intermediaries, and I am sure that was not your
intention. I am also sure that you are aware of the expectation
set out in the Code of Conduct that Members will co-operate at
all stages with a Commissioner's inquiry.
I appreciate the sensitivities of this matter and
that we are now in the recess. I want to give you every opportunity
to respond, but equally you will appreciate that I do need to
bring this matter to a conclusion. I will be reporting on progress
to the Committee at its first meeting when the House resumes.
It would be very helpful, therefore, to know when I can expect
a reply to my letter. I look forward to hearing from you.
30 July 2012
59. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 4 September
2012
This letter is to let you know that, although you
have not responded to my letters to you of 4 and 30 July, I am
nevertheless inviting you to interview so that I can bring this
inquiry to a conclusion.[421]
My previous letters gave you the opportunity to add
to or modify the extensive evidence which you have already given
to me, and drew your attention to the relevant procedural provisions
which make it clear that Members should respond to the Commissioner's
inquiries for themselves and that they are expected to co-operate
with such inquiries at all stages.
I am satisfied that you have already given me sufficient
evidence to enable me to bring this inquiry to a conclusion and
that I have given you a substantial period to comment further
on that evidence. I do not believe that I would be justified in
deferring this matter further, and I would now, therefore, like
to invite you to interview so that we can discuss the main questions
arising on the basis of the evidence you have given me.
My office will, therefore, be in touch with you to
arrange a date and time which is convenient to you. You would,
of course, be welcome to bring a friend or adviser to that interview,
although you will be expected to respond to the questions yourself.
I will write to you before the interview to give you more information
about the process and to let you know the main areas which I suggest
we need to cover.
I would be most grateful for your co-operation at
this final stage of the inquiry.
4 September 2012
60. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 12 September
2012
This letter is to let you know how I will proceed
in the light of your decision not to accept the invitation which
I sent you in my letter of 4 September to come to an interview
at the conclusion of this inquiry.[422]
My letter of 4 September[423]
noted that you had not responded to my previous letters of 4 and
30 July[424]
and said that I would nevertheless like to invite you to interview.
As promised in that letter, my office spoke to you, on 10 September,
to make arrangements for the interview. You made clear that you
did not wish to do so and noted that the matter would go to the
Committee on Standards and Privileges. My office attempted to
get in touch with you for a further word, but was unable to contact
you.
The Code of Conduct requires that: "Members
shall cooperate, at all stages, with any investigation into their
conduct by or under the authority of the House." I am disappointed,
therefore, that you have decided not to cooperate at this final
stage of the inquiryas you cooperated so fully in its previous
stages. I will now proceed to prepare the draft factual sections
of the memorandum which I will be submitting to the Committee
on Standards and Privileges. In accordance with my normal practice,
I will send you the factual sections of the draft memorandum so
that you can comment, if you so wish, on their factual accuracy.
I will then prepare my own conclusions and submit the full memorandum
to the Committee. The Clerk of the Committee will send you a copy
of the full memorandum before the Committee meets to consider
it so that you can comment on it and, if you so wish, ask to give
oral evidence to the Committee.
I hope this letter has set out clearly the remaining
stages of this inquiry. I would be very ready to have an informal
meeting with you at any time to discuss or explain the procedure
more fully. If you would like such a meeting, do please contact
me here at the House.
12 September 2012
61. Letter
to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP, 26 September
2012
Firstly I would like to apologise for the long delay
in replying to your letters. Much of my life was put on hold during
the police investigation into [this] complaint. It was the first
time in four decades of professional work as a political animal
that anything like that had happened. My children were told at
school and university, "Your dad is going to prison".
Almost daily there were blogs, emails or tweets to me, often read
by staff and interns, or circulated in the constituency, proclaiming
that I should be in jail and would soon be going there. I suffered
major international and national reputational damage. I had to
stand down from international delegations and other work to which
I had dedicated years of my life. External work dried up. [...]
Although, thanks to the support of MP colleagues of all parties
as well as the Speaker all of whom know me I was sustained by
continuing as an MP there were many dark moments in the last two
years. Much of my savings, more than £40,000, were expended
on lawyers' fees. I was ill [...] as the police investigation
dragged on for nearly two years.
When finally the dark cloud was lifted I went into
shut down for most of the summer period [...]. I did not think
I was in any fit state to be interviewed in that period.
As you correctly state I hope that in previous correspondence
I have tried to set out the position as I saw it. I was active
in my capacity as an MP on European issues and after 2005 on working
on anti-semitism. The monies I claimed back under the European
Policy Institute invoices I believed to be a reasonable reflection
of the monies that had been spent in relation to parliamentary
business. I believe I could have claimed the costs directly if
I had kept all the individual receipts for each payment or purchase
(if they were given by the supplier). I was aware that claims
could be made of up to £250 per month for petty cash under
the IEP scheme. I made no such claims, instead estimating and
amalgamating all the costs and monies paid for work incidental
to my Parliamentary duties in the EPI invoice claimed under the
IEP Allowance scheme.
I believed that the Allowances Scheme allowed an
MP to estimate various categories of claim up to a reasonable
maximum amount. Since the [...] complaint I have come to realise
that I was unable to provide sufficient documentary evidence to
support all the EPI claims which is why I paid back all the moneys
claimed under that heading. I also came to recognise that my actions
had fallen below the accounting standards that are now required
for individuals claiming public funds and were open to criticism.
During this period I also found out that I had over-claimed by
some £3,000 on my ACA claim forms. Although the Director
of Finance admitted that his own office had failed to spot a fairly
glaring over-claim in the forms I submitted which they should
have done, it was clearly a further example of my own weakness
and failings in office administration and due and proper accounting.
The process of lumping together my out of pocket expenses in EPI
invoices (some related to the then Prime Minister's request I
act as his envoy to European politicians) was the wrong way to
approach the claims and could be the subject of criticism. I regret
not collecting receipts for every item of expenditure and duly
submitting them as I am now doing under the Ipsa scheme. I am
not and never have been sufficiently organised in that way.
I can only repeat my regret and apologies for not
having fully followed the rules to the strictest interpretation
of the letter and bringing down upon my own head the troubles
that have taken up so much of my life since the summer of 2009.
In the light of this I do not think an interview can add anything.
26 September 2012
62. Letter
to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner, 3 October 2012
Thank you for your letter of 26 September[425]
responding to mine of 4 and 30 July and 4 and 12 September.[426]
I was grateful for your statement summarising your
position, which was most useful. I am disappointed, however, that
you have declined to accept my invitation to an interview at a
time convenient to you. Your co-operation here would, I believe,
have helped the Committee when it came to consider my memorandum.
I now enclose the factual sections of my draft memorandum.
While the content of the memorandum is, of course, a matter for
me, I would be very grateful to know whether you are content with
its factual accuracy. If you have any comments on the factual
accuracy, it would be very helpful if you could let me have them
by close on Thursday 11 October.
Subject to your response, I will then prepare my
conclusions before submitting the full memorandum to the Committee
on Standards and Privileges. I will let you and the complainant
know in confidence when I do so. The Clerk of the Committee will
let you have a copy of the full memorandum before the Committee
meets and give you an opportunity to respond, and to ask to give
oral evidence to the Committee if you so wish.
I look forward to hearing from you by close on Thursday
11 October. If there is any difficulty about this or you would
like a word about the process, do please contact me at the House.
3 October 2012
63. Extract
from letter to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP,
8 October 2012
[...]
[In the memorandum] you write EPI invoices were signed
"by a member of Mr MacShane's staff at his request."
That is not what I wrote to you on 22 July [WE 53]. This was investigated
by the police as you know and I would be grateful if you could
quote in full the relevant sentence in [WE 53] so that facts are
clear in your own report.
[...]
8 October 2012
64. Extract
from letter to Rt Hon Denis MacShane MP from the Commissioner,
9 October 2012
[...]
Finally, you will see that I have, at your request,
amended the reference in paragraph [...] relating to who actually
signed the invoices. I had taken from your letter of 22 July 2009
the fact that your staff scrawled the "nom de plume"
in the same way that they scrawl your own name.[427]
But I take it from your letter of 8 October 2012 that this is
not correct. I have therefore made clear that you scrawled the
"nom de plume" yourself. If this is wrong, could you
contact me by return to let me know whether you signed the name,
your staff signed the name, or you both did on different occasions?
Otherwise, I will assume that it was you yourself.
[...]
9 October 2012
65. Extract
from letter to the Commissioner from Rt Hon Denis Macshane MP,
10 October 2012
[...]
Your changes are perfectly reasonable but I must
ask that you stick to the text and not make assumptions. This
matter was dealt with by the police and I do not propose to reopen
it. So please use what I wrote [in WE 53] namely:
"I and I alone take full responsibility for
all the payments and claims made by the EPI as a vehicle. My staff
scrawl my name regularly on letters and the reference to [name]
is to a similarly scrawled nom de plume."
Of course you have the right and power to write what
you want but as far as I am concerned that phrase is the correct
one from my earlier written evidence.
10 October 2012
254 WE 2 Back
255
Committee on Standards and Privileges, Eighth Report of Session
2007-08, The Complaints System and the Criminal Law, HC
523 Back
256
Mr Barnbrook signed his letter as the Spokesman on Law and Order,
British National Party. He let me know on 7 July 2012 (not included
in the written evidence) that he was no longer a member of that
political party. Back
257
WE 1 Back
258
WE 3 Back
259
WE 1 Back
260
WE 1 and 4 Back
261
WE 5 Back
262
WE 7 Back
263
WE 6 and WE 5 Back
264
WE 5 Back
265
This refers to the review undertaken by Sir Thomas Legg of Members'
claims against the Additional Costs Allowance. See Members Estimate
Committee, First Report of Session 2009-10, Review of Past
ACA Payments, HC 343. Back
266
Not included in the written evidence Back
267
WE 9 Back
268
WE 8 Back
269
WE 8 Back
270
Not included in the written evidence. For a revised version, see
WE 33. Back
271
Not included in the written evidence. For a revised version, see
WE 33. Back
272
WE 6 Back
273
WE 8 Back
274
WE 10 Back
275
WE 12 Back
276
Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Annual Report 2008-09,
HC 608, paragraph 3.25 Back
277
WE 10 Back
278
This was never received. Back
279
WE 11 Back
280
WE 10 Back
281
Not included in the written evidence. For the final version, see
WE 33. Back
282
WE 6 Back
283
WE 6 Back
284
WE 12 Back
285
WE 5 Back
286
WE 5 and WE 8 Back
287
WE 13 Back
288
WE 11 Back
289
WE 10 Back
290
WE 14 Back
291
WE 9 Back
292
WE 10 Back
293
WE 9 Back
294
Not included in the written evidence Back
295
WE 11 Back
296
WE 13 Back
297
WE 8 Back
298
Not included in the written evidence Back
299
WE 9 Back
300
WE 13 Back
301
WE 5 Back
302
See footnote 195. Back
303
WE 13 and WE 15 Back
304
Not included in the written evidence. Back
305
Not included in the written evidence. Back
306
WE 19-25 Back
307
WE 19-22 Back
308
The Industrial Union of Metalworkers. Back
309
Not included in the written evidence Back
310
WE 26 Back
311
In the event, I have not needed to use this name. Back
312
WE 27 Back
313
WE 28 Back
314
WE 30 Back
315
WE 17 Back
316
WE 17 Back
317
WE 13 and WE 15 Back
318
WE 26 Back
319
WE 28 Back
320
Not included in the written evidence Back
321
WE 17 Back
322
The cash payments amounted to the equivalent of about £4,500
at the relevant times. Back
323
WE 33 Back
324
WE 20 Back
325
WE 19 Back
326
WE 20 Back
327
WE 19 Back
328
WE 21 Back
329
WE 22 Back
330
WE 20 Back
331
WE 20 Back
332
WE 19 Back
333
WE 21 Back
334
WE 22 Back
335
WE 20 Back
336
WE 19 Back
337
WE 22 Back
338
WE 26 and WE 28 Back
339
WE 14 Back
340
WE 32 Back
341
Not included in the written evidence Back
342
WE 35 Back
343
WE 34 Back
344
WE 33 Back
345
WE 33 Back
346
Not included in the written evidence Back
347
WE 36 Back
348
WE 1 Back
349
WE 5 Back
350
WE 6 Back
351
WE 8 Back
352
WE 9 Back
353
WE 10 Back
354
WE 11 and WE 12 Back
355
WE 13 Back
356
WE 14 Back
357
WE 15 Back
358
WE 25, WE 26, WE 28 and WE 30 Back
359
Not included in the written evidence Back
360
WE 27 and WE 33 Back
361
WE 34. This response was also received as a letter. Back
362
WE 32 and WE 33 Back
363
WE 34 Back
364
WE 38 Back
365
Not included in the written evidence Back
366
WE 33 Back
367
Not included in the written evidence Back
368
WE 6 Back
369
WE 39 Back
370
WE 38 Back
371
Not included in the written evidence Back
372
WE 32 Back
373
WE 40 Back
374
WE 38 Back
375
Not included in the written evidence Back
376
WE 39 Back
377
WE 40 Back
378
WE 41 Back
379
WE 45 Back
380
WE 42 Back
381
WE 43 Back
382
WE 44 and WE 45 Back
383
WE 38 Back
384
Not included in the written evidence Back
385
WE 47 Back
386
WE 9 Back
387
WE 11 Back
388
WE 41 Back
389
WE 40 Back
390
WE 42 Back
391
WE 46 Back
392
WE 41 Back
393
Not included in the written evidence. For an example of an EPI
invoice, see WE 49. Back
394
WE 48 Back
395
Not included in the written evidence Back
396
WE 17 Back
397
WE 32 Back
398
WE 34 Back
399
WE 11 Back
400
WE 42 Back
401
WE 42, WE 46 and WE 50 Back
402
WE 32 Back
403
This note was not received. Back
404
WE 46 Back
405
Not included in the written evidence. Back
406
WE 51 Back
407
WE 42, WE 46 and WE 50 Back
408
WE 42 Back
409
WE 53 Back
410
WE 52 Back
411
WE 53 Back
412
WE 11 Back
413
WE 52 Back
414
WE 54 Back
415
See footnote 195. Back
416
See footnote 195. Back
417
WE 30 Back
418
Not included in the written evidence Back
419
Not included in the written evidence Back
420
WE 57 Back
421
WE 57 and WE 58 Back
422
WE 59 Back
423
WE 59 Back
424
WE 57 and WE 58 Back
425
WE 61 Back
426
WE 57-60 Back
427
WE 53 Back
|