Expenses row: 'There should be no get out of jail card'

Published on Sunday 7 February 2010 21:55

FOUR parliamentarians facing criminal charges over their expenses should be hauled before the courts to account for their actions, Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, said yesterday.

&#149 Jim Devine argues his case is a matter for parliament, not court

Speaking as speculation mounted that the politicians, including Livingston MP Jim Devine, may try to escape prosecution by claiming parliamentary privilege, Mr Johnson said the public would be "aghast" if they relied on the Westminster convention to avoid court action.

On Friday, it was announced three Labour MPs and one Conservative peer will be prosecuted for false accounting after the English Director of Public Prosecutions decided there was sufficient evidence to bring charges under the Theft Act.

Mr Devine is accused of using a series of false invoices to claim 3,240 for cleaning and maintenance services in his second home as well as 5,500 for office stationery.

He later admitted to submitting fake invoices but denied the false accounting charges on the basis he had not benefited from the deception.

He also claimed the appropriate forum for disciplining him and his Labour colleagues David Chaytor and Elliot Morley, as well as Tory peer Lord Hanningfield, was in Westminster, prompting fears that the group would attempt to claim parliamentary privilege made them immune from prosecution.

It is now understood lawyers for the four are preparing defences based on the claim that their expenses are a "proceeding of parliament", protected from prosecution by the 1698 Bill of Rights.

Keir Starmer, the DPP, has indicated he is happy for this defence to be tested in court, but yesterday senior politicians lined up to denounce the move.

Mr Johnson said: "My colleagues in parliament should get a fair trial. That fair trial should be on the same basis as any member of the public that goes through the court system. They should go through the courts system."

He went on: "The point about this dreadful, damaging year we have had is that people want to see MPs treated in the same way they would be treated had they broken the law.

"Very few MPs have broken the law. There has been issues about expenses, there have been issues about how the system is run and all of that is being tackled.

"A few – very few – have been thought to have broken the law. That is the accusation. They are entitled to a fair trial.

"The public would be aghast if they thought there was some special 'get out of jail card' for parliamentarians."

Shadow business secretary Ken Clark said: "It strikes me as very fanciful to think that parliamentary privilege can be invoked.

"Parliamentary privilege exists to preserve the right to free speech – you do have to keep parliamentary privilege in the debating chambers," he said.

"I'd be absolutely astonished and completely appalled actually if parliamentary privilege was invoked for such charges."

Shadow foreign secretary William Hague added: "They should face prosecution, in the courts.

"The Bill of Rights was intended to secure the freedom of members of parliament to speak freely rather than be at threat from an over-powerful monarch."

Elsewhere, anger over MPs' expenses showed no signs of abating yesterday as it emerged that the timing of any criminal trial is likely to preclude the MPs from being banned from collecting their resettlement grants.