Since MP’s returned from their 3 month break, no doubt hoping the expenses row would be long forgotten, but it appears they still don’t get it.

 

A handful of Labour MPs is trying to block the police ­investigation into the ­possible criminal abuse of Commons expenses, the Sunday Herald can reveal.

 

It is understood the group has warned the Metropolitian Police that probes into expenses may breach “­parliamentary privilege”, the ancient right that protects proceedings in Parliament, which notably allows freedom of speech in the Commons chamber.

 

A senior Labour source confirmed some MPs have taken legal advice on whether parliamentary privilege extends to expenses, potentially putting them off-limits to the police.

 

Although it was reported yesterday that Labour MP Elliot Morley may be charged in the New Year, detectives fear they may not be able to make arrests even if a politician has made fraudulent claims.

 

Some members are threatening to go to court to avoid repaying money demanded by Sir Thomas Legg, the independent auditor. Others are considering challenging their party leadership for banning them as candidates over their expenses.

 

How come if you were overpayed tax credits or you fraudulently claim benefits you have to repay them and might get prosecuted, but MP’s can get away with it.

 

Jacqui Smith gets caught out taking £116,000 wrongly over her second homes claims, and she gets away with having to say sorry in the House of Commons. Unbelievable.

 

Some MP’s rightly, are having to repay amounts over their claims, but the serious fraudsters, the second home culprits are getting away with it.

Technically the MPs may be right about parliamentary privilege. It is also true to say that there is a difference between benefit fraud and excessive expenses claims. The amounts MPs are being asked to repay were within the rules at the time.

 

BUT they should realise the damage this whole sorry saga is doing to British politics iin general, cough up and stop whingeing. The limits being applied retrospectively are quite low (it may have been fairer to apply these limits to future claims and slightly higher ones to past claims). However, if the second home is a small flat - whether in London or the constituency - they are probably adequate. Obviously, if the second home is a flat there would be little or no need to claim for a gardener.

 

Where the Labour MPs and Nick Clegg are right to be angry is over the matter or mortgage claims. There are many MPs (mostly Tories and including Cameron) who have been able to claim for the mortgage on their - often very large - constituency home while calling their more modest London home their main home.

 

As for Jacqui Smith, the Tories in particular haven't got a leg to stand on. Until fairly recently all ministers had to designate their London home as their main home. When Labour changed the rules, the Tories opposed the change. If those rules hadn't been changed (i.e. if the Tories had their way), Smith would have had no choice and would have had to say that her sister's home was her main home.