Brian Binley claimed £1,500 a month to rent the flat for more than three years, despite House of Commons rules forbidding MPs from renting properties from themselves or their companies.
The Daily Telegraph can disclose that Mr Binley’s rental claims were first flagged up by parliamentary officials in April 2006, but the payments were not stopped until April of this year.
In 2006, he was told that the claims were not allowed. But he was permitted to continue claiming after appealing to Michael Martin, the Speaker of the House of Commons. Mr Martin only ruled in April 2009 that the claims must stop but Mr Binley has not had to repay the £57,000 he improperly received while the Speaker deliberated.
The latest disclosure concerning MPs’ expenses will cast further serious doubts over the policing of the system by the parliamentary authorities.
The House of Commons is expected to publish details of each MP’s expense claims tomorrow. However, the information is expected to be heavily censored, with addresses and other key details blacked out. With only this information, questionable claims — such as those made by Mr Binley — would be very difficult, if not impossible, to uncover.
The latest disclosure comes as:
The Parliamentary Standards Commissioner began an investigation into the expense claims made by Shahid Malik, the Communities Minister. The Daily Telegraph disclosed last week that Mr Malik received thousands of pounds to rent “office space” which was actually on the ground floor of his constituency home.
It is not clear why Mr Binley, the MP for Northampton South, was permitted to continue receiving substantial sums of taxpayers’ money for more than three years despite being in breach of the rules.
Mr Binley was elected to the Commons in May 2005. He at first used the “second home” parliamentary allowance — the additional costs allowance (ACA) — to stay at the Carlton Club in London, a gentleman’s club for Conservative supporters.
In February 2006, he began claiming rent at £1,500 a month for a flat in Pimlico, close to the Houses of Parliament. Land Registry records show that the flat is owned by a company called BCC Marketing, which had purchased the property in December the previous year for £345,000.
Mr Binley is the chairman and founder of BCC Marketing and currently owns 20 per cent of the shares in the company. His wife Jacqueline holds a further 20 per cent of the shares while his son James works for the business.
Initially, the arrangement for Mr Binley to pay his own company may have been within MPs’ rules. In 2005, the Green Book, which sets out parliamentary rules, stated that MPs were barred from claiming for “the costs of leasing accommodation from yourself”. However, in April 2006, the rules were tightened specifically to bar MPs from paying rent to their own companies. Following the change, the House of Commons fees office contacted Mr Binley to inform him that his arrangement was outside the rules.
Mr Binley appealed and, when Mr Martin rejected it two months ago, Mr Binley says that he moved out of BCC Marketing’s flat and into nearby premises.
He has insisted that the rent he paid to the company did not fully cover the costs of the mortgage on the flat. However, had he bought the flat directly himself he would only have been able to claim for the interest on the mortgage, which is substantially less than the full cost of repaying the loan.
After The Daily Telegraph began disclosing information about MPs’ expenses last month, Mr Binley held a public meeting in his constituency and handed out copies of his expenses, with addresses redacted.
“I have dealt with my expense claims honourably and honestly, and will be handing out a full breakdown of my claims, year by year,” said Mr Binley at the time. “Anyone who wants to tar us all with the same brush should be ashamed of themselves.”
Mr Binley’s actions are likely to put David Cameron under pressure to discipline him. It is understood that the MP’s controversial arrangement had not been disclosed to the Conservative Party’s scrutiny committee, which is examining expense claims made by the party’s MPs. The committee is now expected to re-examine Mr Binley’s expenses.
Mr Binley defended his decision to pay rent to BCC Marketing. “I am an MP from a working-class background who knows that most of his constituents don’t earn much above the average wage and therefore treats taxpayers’ money with the care it deserves,” he said.
“I did rent a flat for the reasons that I have stated from a company that I founded. The rent charged included council tax, water rates, electricity, gas, and all the furnishings and white goods in the flat. In addition, I paid the cleaner, rightly and properly, from my own pocket.
“When the mortgage was taken out, it was totally cleared by the Fees Office and when the rules were changed which stated that I could not rent from a company that I had an interest in, I appealed that decision. I sadly lost that appeal, accepted the decision and found another flat which unfortunately costs the taxpayer more money because that is the going rate.”
The Daily Telegraph can disclose that Mr Binley’s rental claims were first flagged up by parliamentary officials in April 2006, but the payments were not stopped until April of this year.
In 2006, he was told that the claims were not allowed. But he was permitted to continue claiming after appealing to Michael Martin, the Speaker of the House of Commons. Mr Martin only ruled in April 2009 that the claims must stop but Mr Binley has not had to repay the £57,000 he improperly received while the Speaker deliberated.
The latest disclosure concerning MPs’ expenses will cast further serious doubts over the policing of the system by the parliamentary authorities.
The House of Commons is expected to publish details of each MP’s expense claims tomorrow. However, the information is expected to be heavily censored, with addresses and other key details blacked out. With only this information, questionable claims — such as those made by Mr Binley — would be very difficult, if not impossible, to uncover.
The latest disclosure comes as:
The Parliamentary Standards Commissioner began an investigation into the expense claims made by Shahid Malik, the Communities Minister. The Daily Telegraph disclosed last week that Mr Malik received thousands of pounds to rent “office space” which was actually on the ground floor of his constituency home.
It is not clear why Mr Binley, the MP for Northampton South, was permitted to continue receiving substantial sums of taxpayers’ money for more than three years despite being in breach of the rules.
Mr Binley was elected to the Commons in May 2005. He at first used the “second home” parliamentary allowance — the additional costs allowance (ACA) — to stay at the Carlton Club in London, a gentleman’s club for Conservative supporters.
In February 2006, he began claiming rent at £1,500 a month for a flat in Pimlico, close to the Houses of Parliament. Land Registry records show that the flat is owned by a company called BCC Marketing, which had purchased the property in December the previous year for £345,000.
Mr Binley is the chairman and founder of BCC Marketing and currently owns 20 per cent of the shares in the company. His wife Jacqueline holds a further 20 per cent of the shares while his son James works for the business.
Initially, the arrangement for Mr Binley to pay his own company may have been within MPs’ rules. In 2005, the Green Book, which sets out parliamentary rules, stated that MPs were barred from claiming for “the costs of leasing accommodation from yourself”. However, in April 2006, the rules were tightened specifically to bar MPs from paying rent to their own companies. Following the change, the House of Commons fees office contacted Mr Binley to inform him that his arrangement was outside the rules.
Mr Binley appealed and, when Mr Martin rejected it two months ago, Mr Binley says that he moved out of BCC Marketing’s flat and into nearby premises.
He has insisted that the rent he paid to the company did not fully cover the costs of the mortgage on the flat. However, had he bought the flat directly himself he would only have been able to claim for the interest on the mortgage, which is substantially less than the full cost of repaying the loan.
After The Daily Telegraph began disclosing information about MPs’ expenses last month, Mr Binley held a public meeting in his constituency and handed out copies of his expenses, with addresses redacted.
“I have dealt with my expense claims honourably and honestly, and will be handing out a full breakdown of my claims, year by year,” said Mr Binley at the time. “Anyone who wants to tar us all with the same brush should be ashamed of themselves.”
Mr Binley’s actions are likely to put David Cameron under pressure to discipline him. It is understood that the MP’s controversial arrangement had not been disclosed to the Conservative Party’s scrutiny committee, which is examining expense claims made by the party’s MPs. The committee is now expected to re-examine Mr Binley’s expenses.
Mr Binley defended his decision to pay rent to BCC Marketing. “I am an MP from a working-class background who knows that most of his constituents don’t earn much above the average wage and therefore treats taxpayers’ money with the care it deserves,” he said.
“I did rent a flat for the reasons that I have stated from a company that I founded. The rent charged included council tax, water rates, electricity, gas, and all the furnishings and white goods in the flat. In addition, I paid the cleaner, rightly and properly, from my own pocket.
“When the mortgage was taken out, it was totally cleared by the Fees Office and when the rules were changed which stated that I could not rent from a company that I had an interest in, I appealed that decision. I sadly lost that appeal, accepted the decision and found another flat which unfortunately costs the taxpayer more money because that is the going rate.”
1 comment:
this is a disgrace!.. how many more stories will come out soon too
Post a Comment