Tory claims £57,000 to rent flat from own company.

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.”

Brian Binley and how his conscience is clear, this is just a witch hunt

Happily, I have never lived in a totalitarian state. But this week I was given an insight into what it must have been like in the dark days of East European Communism to receive the infamous knock on the door from those delightful individuals who once did the dirty work of the Stasi and the KGB.

In my case, it came in the form of an email from the Daily Telegraph, informing me that I had "questions to answer" about my living arrangements in London in the three years after I was elected to Parliament in 2005.

My conscience was perfectly clear, and after reading the "accusations", I knew there was nothing for which I had to answer and duly contacted the reporter to explain the situation.

But frankly, I might not have bothered. Sadly, such is now the Telegraph's thirst and hunger for making mischief since obtaining the records of MPs' expenses, that it has long since abandoned the idea of fair and honest reporting.

Of course, some MPs have deservedly been exposed for the misuse of public funds, be it claiming for non-existent mortgages, "flipping" between homes, or claiming a fiver for a wreath they bought for Remembrance Sunday.

But now the newspaper has turned it into a McCarthyite witch-hunt for the sake of a circulation increase. It is doing the reputation of British journalism a lot of damage.

Anyway, I phoned the reporter, and began to explain the situation, but it did not take me more than a few seconds to realise that she had no intention of engaging in a fair and proper conversation. She – or rather the Telegraph's newsdesk – had already decided that they were going to run a story about me and whatever I said was not going to change that. Her attitude was aggressive and sometimes downright rude, and it left a sour taste once I put the phone down.

I then waited with baited breath for Wednesday's Telegraph to come out, and when it finally did, I was stunned.

Stunned that my story had made its front-page lead; and stunned by the insidious implications, like referring to me as a millionaire. What on earth is the relevance of that, whether I am or not? It was a grubby way of insinuating that I was some hard-nosed capitalist out to make an easy buck at anyone's expense, and I deeply resent that.

For the record, the Telegraph implied that I had broken the rules by renting a flat in London that was bought by a company I founded, and ran, before becoming an MP, and that, essentially, I was paying rent to myself. Bunkum.

My company did buy a property near Westminster, but it was a commercial decision agreed to by the board of directors. It was the property of BCC Marketing, and it was perfectly correct that I pay rent. And let me make two points here: if I didn't pay rent to BCC Marketing, I would have had to pay rent to another landlord and the rent I paid was all inclusive (council tax, utility bills, and so on), and cheaper than I would have paid for similar accommodation I might have rented privately.

And the company was about £38,000 down on the deal over the three-year period. So much for implying that I had diverted taxpayers' money for my own personal benefit.

I had cleared my living arrangements with the Fees Office at Parliament, and then the rules changed, so I had to move out, though I appealed against the changes before I did so.

All in all, it is a non-story. My Northampton South constituency executive have always been aware of the situation and were perfectly at ease as I featured in news bulletins during the day. I obliged with all interview requests, because I was angry at what the Telegraph had done, the way it had ignored my explanations, and the damage to my reputation.

Thankfully, the local media in Northampton have been extremely professional in their treatment of the story. So much so, that constituents who were initially angered after first reading, or hearing, the "allegations" about me, and said so, have since been in touch to apologise and admit that further investigation reveals nothing. Exactly.

And this is the point. The Telegraph is doing enormous damage in its hunger to exploit the expenses scandal to its own commercial profit. Of course it did some good initially, and of course the expenses system needs an overhaul. I have been saying that since I first arrived at Westminster.

But this has gone too far, and it is about time someone stood up to them. They have taken it upon themselves to become judge and jury, without any thought to seeking the truth before they publish.

It reminds me of Rudyard Kipling's famous quote for Stanley Baldwin: "What the proprietorship of these papers is aiming at is power, and power without responsibility – the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages."

Patrick Cormack

Sir Patrick Cormack claimed more than £1,000 a month in rent for his second home in London. Other claims included £329 on a TV £200 on a radio and £349.97 on replacement reading lamps.

Douglas Carswell's Love seat?

Douglas Carswell claimed £655 from his expenses for a love seat.

Peter Bone claims £1,300 a month rent

Peter Bone claims £1,300 a month rent on a flat in London, along with £400 a month food. His other claims included £299.99 on a television, £87.98 on a DVD player and £599.98 on two sofas.

Richard Bacon rent bill of £1,538 a month?

Richard Bacon designated second home in London, where he claimed £1,235 in monthly mortgage interest between 2004 and 2007. Claimed for £2,500 to repaint and redecorate flat in spring of 2006.

Moved out in 2007 and stayed in hotels until he rented in Dolphin Square at £1,538 a month.

MPs block bid to stop golden farewells

The Senior Salaries Review Body (SSRB) formally recommended last year that the payments – worth up to £64,766 – should no longer be given to MPs who choose to stand down.

Only those who suddenly needed a job after losing their seat in an election should be eligible, it said, rather than those who knew long beforehand that they would be leaving Parliament.

Had it been implemented, the proposal could have saved the taxpayer millions of pounds at the next general election, when dozens of MPs are expected to stand down following the expenses scandal.

However, in an unusual move, the Speaker’s Committee – a group of MPs including Michael Martin, the Speaker; Harriet Harman, the leader of the House; and Alan Duncan, the shadow leader of the House – rejected the recommendation.

Their decision was never publicised. It was finalised two months ago, after party leaders had been warned privately that many MPs would be embarrassed by the disclosure of their expenses’ claims.

Since The Daily Telegraph began its investigation into the expenses system, more than 15 MPs have announced that they will stand down at the next general election.

It has been predicted that many others will follow. However, to the anger of many of their constituents, all of them will be entitled to the “parachute” payment, or Resettlement Grant as it is officially called.

It is worth up to a year’s salary, depending on the MP’s length of service and age, and the first £30,000 of it is tax-free.

The rejection of the SSRB’s recommendation also means that even those MPs who have been suspended from their parties or forced to stand down over the scandal will receive the payments.

Among those who will be given the grant are Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Ben Chapman, all of whom made “phantom claims” for mortgage interest on home loans which did not exist.

They were subsequently banned from standing by the Labour Party.

However, in addition to the resettlement grant and their gold-plated final salary pension schemes, “retiring” MPs will receive other payments for up to a year before the next election.

They are entitled to a “winding up allowance” of as much as £42,068 for costs including paying off staff, many of whom are their spouses or relations.

Gordon Brown and David Cameron, the Labour and Conservative leaders, have already come under pressure from Nick Clegg, their Liberal Democrat counterpart, to scrap the parachute payments before the next election.

Mr Cameron has said that he will wait for independent recommendations, despite it now emerging that such proposals have alreadybeen made and privately rejected.

The SSRB, which publishes regular studies on Parliamentary pay, pensions and allowances and is made up of Whitehall officials, recommended an end to the payments last year.

In its January 2008 report, which was presented to Parliament, Sir John Baker, the head of the SSRB, said: “We consider the purpose of the grant is analogous to redundancy payments and we recommend that it should no longer be paid to MPs who retire or resign.”

However, minutes from a meeting held in the Speaker’s house in March 2008 and attended by the Labour MP Sir Stuart Bell, the Lib Dem Nick Harvey and the Conservative David Maclean, noted that the group disagreed with the SSRB about the resettlement grant.

“The view was expressed that the SSRB had underestimated the uncertainty of parliamentary life and the impact on Members after normal retirement age,” the minutes stated.

By June 2008, the Speaker’s Committee had decided that if MPs could only get the resettlement grant by standing again, they might deliberately stand for unwinnable seats, which would be “difficult to manage”.

By April 2009, the committee had decided to reject the SSRB proposal. The new Green Book of Parliamentary rules stated that the payments would be made “for all Members who fail to be re-elected or who do not stand at a general election”.

The resettlement grant is also available to MPs who stand down during a parliament because of ill-health. These MPs have to write to the director of the fees office setting out their situation.

MPs including Ian McCartney, Elliot Morley and Margaret Moran (all Labour) have all mentioned health problems in their resignation statements. It is not known whether any MPs have contacted the fees office. At the 2005 election, 136 MPs left the Commons and got £5.3 million, an average of 64 per cent of their salary.

Only 49 would have received the resettlement grant under the proposals.

More than 15 MPs, including the Conservatives Douglas Hogg, Julie Kirkbride and Sir Peter Viggers, have now announced that they will stand down at the next election after The Daily Telegraph published details about their expenses.

Mark Francois - A bit of an animal

While other politicians billed for flat screen televisions and moat clearing, Mark Francois, the shadow minister for Europe, claimed for a wide variety of on-the-go snacks through his expenses.

His claims included Mars bars, Snickers, Kit Kats, wine gums, Twiglets, Jaffa Cakes, chocolate biscuits, Pringles crisps and "bags of sweets".

The Conservative MP for Rayleigh in Essex also claimed for Häagen-Dazs ice cream, lemon sorbet, choc ices, crisps, Starburst, Bourneville dark chocolate and Trebor mints. Among his purchases were several Peperami "hot" 5 packs. The spicy pork snack is marketed with the slogan: "Peperami: It's a Bit of an Animal".

Under the second home allowance MPs were allowed to claim a food allowance of up to £400 per month without receipts. But, unlike many of his colleagues, Mr Francois was scrupulous about claiming exact amounts for his food purchases and submitting receipts for them.

A typical receipt from a trip to his local Tesco showed that he spent £7.87 on ice cream, £4.36 on bags of sweets, £3.24 on Kit Kats, £2.68 on Mars bars, £1.28 on Snickers bars, and 96p on wine gums.

On another visit he spent £5.04 on Mars bars, £3.24 on Kit Kats and £2.42 on a Pot Noodle. A separate grocery trip saw him picking up two Peperami "hot" 5 packs for £2.18 each, and spending £14.26 on biscuits, and another £3.26 on "bags of sweets".

Before entering Parliament, the MP served as an infantry officer in the Territorial Army, including with the Royal Anglian Regiment, and his hobbies include hill walking.

He claimed £1,500 per month to rent a second home in London and made very few other claims apart from food bills. The other claims did include £12.94 on toothbrushes and the purchase of three alarm clocks in the space of three years.

Mr Francois said of his claims: "Given all of the revelations over the last month I hope none of this seems particularly excessive but, like almost every other MP, I recognise that the system does need to be reformed and the quicker the better."

SNAPSHOT

Mark Francois

Job: Conservative MP for Rayleigh, shadow minister for Europe

Salary: £64,766

Total second home claims

2004-05: £19,990

2005-06: £18,509

2006-07: £20,374

2007-08: £20,689

David Mundell claimed more than £3,000 on MPs' expenses to take photographs of himself

The "Out and About" section of his website displays more than 700 pictures, mostly of Mr Mundell in various different parts of his Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale constituency.

Mr Mundell appears to have set himself the task of visiting as many places in his constituency as he can and getting his picture taken beside the road sign as proof.

His tour has so far taken him to Bankend, Beattock, Boreland, Cardrona, Clarencefield, Durisdeermill, Ecclefechan, Gretna and Hightae, to name but a few.

He is also pictured taking overseas trips overseas to places such as Israel and Rwanda.

His passion for photography got him into trouble in August 2006, according to details contained in his expense claims.

A picture of "David Mundell and Family at Biggar Bonfire" was used on the MP's website and in a parliamentary report, without authorisation from the photographer.

As a result, Mr Mundell was sent an invoice for £175 for its use on the website with another £175 added on top as a penalty for failing to seek his permission.

The other reproduction was also charged at a "double rate" of £180, bringing the total bill to more than £620 with the inclusion of VAT.

Some negotiation seems to have taken place over the penalty fees which are scored out on the invoice and replaced by smaller sums, so that the total comes to £428, an amount which Mr Mundell claimed on his Incidental Expenditure Provision (IEP) expenses, which are designed to cover office costs.

On Saturday Mr Mundell said an error had been made and added: "I take personal responsibility for that and will reimburse the sum involved."

The picture is no longer included among the hundreds on his website, but there are numerous others such as "David with brick on head" from an August 2007 trip to Rwanda; two pictures of the MP at the "Crowning of Anna's Queen of the Border" – but none of the queen; one of him pulling a pint behind the Strangers' Bar in Parliament; and another showing Mr Mundell in a colourful costume to promote the "Be Loud" bowel cancer campaign in January last year.

It is possible that some of these will have been taken with one of two Olympus cameras bought from John Lewis for a total of £528 in May 2006.

In April last year Mr Mundell bought a copy of Adobe Photoshop, a computer programme used to edit digital photographs, for £468.

Mr Mundell was ranked among the worst performers in an analysis of MPs' value for money by The Sunday Telegraph.

He came in 587th place for 2007/08 based on his contribution in parliament as he attended 47 per cent of votes, spoke in only 11 debates and submitted just 16 written questions in the year while claiming £169,187 in total expenses, including travel, home, office and staffing costs.

Most pictures on Mr Mundell's website appear to be the work of an amateur, but he does also employ professional photographers and claims back their fees on expenses.

In March 2006, he hired one to photograph a school visit to the Palace of Westminister at a cost of £117.50.

The same photographer was on hand in October 2007 to capture the Scottish Agricultural College's visit to the House of Commons for £99.87.

In Scotland, another professional photographer was paid £140 in October 2007 "to photograph David around Peebles and Lead Burn Junction".

Another captured him "meeting road contractors" in Canonbie, and at Langholm for a "Save Eskdale" event in August of that year, for fees totalling £220.

Mr Mundell said:

"Over four years, the cost of photographs and equipment work out at about £65 per month and I am happy for the Conservative independent scrutiny panel to review whether that is excessive."

"I use photographs on the website. I send photographs to the 12 local newspapers in my constituency and I also use photographs for Parliamentary publications."

"I hold an annual surgery tour of the constituency where I visit over a hundred venues. I think it appropriate to demonstrate to my constituents that I have been in their community by providing photographic evidence of those tours."

"These photographs are not taken by a professional photographer so whether there are 700 or 7 photographs it wouldn't cost the taxpayer any more or less."

Mr Mundell said he had already repaid a sum to cover the cost of beer, a Gingerbread Santa and a Gingerbread Rudolph which appear on receipts to back up claims made on his IEP

Mr Mundell said he was uncertain whether they had been part of a claim or included on receipts for other items which were being claimed for.

"But I recognised the potential for ambiguity when I went through my receipts myself as part of the redacting exercise," he said.

He claimed there were good reasons for his low activity levels in parliament. "As a member of the Shadow Cabinet, I am obliged to follow Conservative party policy for Scottish MPs and not vote on English-only matters.

"This has a considerable impact on my simple percentage voting record.

"As the frontbencher who has responsibility for Scotland, I am restricted by the Commons rules on the issues on which I can intervene in general debate."

He added that he was the only Scottish Conservative MP and also Shadow Secretary of State with "a broad range of responsibilities and duties on which I am required to be in Scotland".

David Mundell

Job: Conservative MP for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale and shadow Scottish secretary

Salary: £64,766

Total second home claims

2004-05: N/A

2005-06: £19,177

2006-07: £22,079

2007-08: £22,177

Total expenses

2007-08: £169,187

Rate of attendance at votes: 47 per cent

Andrew Turner claimed for 'life coaching' classes for his parliamentary assistant girlfriend

Carole Dennett, who was described at an employment tribunal as becoming "fiery" after a "liquid lunch", wrote to the fees office that she hoped the 2005 general election would then pass "in an alcoholic blur".

Her boyfriend, Andrew Turner, also used his office expenses to fund "life coaching" classes for another member of staff.

Mr Turner, a former vice-chairman of the Tory party, has represented the Isle of Wight since 2001 and employs Miss Dennett to run his constituency office.

In 2004, he was ordered to pay £10,250 to Colin Hedgley, his former office manager, after a tribunal found he had been unfairly dismissed. He had been sacked at a disciplinary interview that he could not attend because he was off work through stress.

Mr Hedgley told the tribunal of a "poisonous" atmosphere in the office, and described how Miss Dennett had once subjected him to a 20-minute "tirade" that left his "knees knocking and his stomach churning".

Other employees gave evidence that Mr Turner was "very weak" and that Miss Dennett appeared "fiery", "especially when crossed or if she'd taken a liquid lunch".

After the tribunal chairman ruled that Mr Turner supported his girlfriend ahead of staff – even though her treatment of other workers was "far below acceptable" – Mr Turner used his incidental expenses provision, used to cover the costs of running a constituency office, to pay £6,471 of the compensation bill.

He had also claimed £940 for "HR advice and support" during the dispute with his former employee.

The month before the general election in 2005, Miss Dennett, in an email to the Commons fees office after they asked for bank account details, wrote: "Look forward to receiving the money – I shall then be able to spend it on lots of booze so that the forthcoming election goes in an alcoholic blur.

"What do you think?"

The following year, Mr Turner submitted a bundle of receipts for office goods that included £6 worth of wrapping paper bought from Matalan on Christmas Eve. The fees office did not question the claims.

He was also reimbursed £240 for a member of staff to study GCSE maths, but had a £424 claim for a camcorder and £20 for a leaving gift rejected. That summer Mr Turner put through a £160 invoice for a member of staff to have "life coaching (4 sessions)".

Mr Turner also submitted a £20 receipt for House of Commons cufflinks and £139 for a digital radio, even though he had bought another for £199 the previous year.

The couple designate their jointly owned house on the Isle of Wight as their second home, on which they claim about £1,100 a month in mortgage interest payments.

Mr Turner said in a statement: "All costs relating to industrial tribunals can be legitimately claimed against parliamentary expenses. All costs were fully agreed with the fees office."

Asked about the "booze" email, he replied: "In the cold light of day this could be judged as inappropriate but it was a private joke between two people who were in regular contact." He admitted the wrapping paper "should clearly have been crossed off the claim".

He said the life coaching was agreed in advance with the Commons. "Relationships between staff in my office are good," he added.

Andrew Turner

Job: backbench Conservative MP for the Isle of Wight

Salary: £64,766

Total second home claims

2004-05: £19,983

2005-06: £19,997

2006-07: £20,064

2007-08: £19,953

Michael Howard paid £44,000 to Conservatives

The former minister made regular payments to the Folkestone and Hythe Conservative Association as part of his incidental expenses provision. In total he claimed £44,760 between 2004 and 2008.

A week ago it emerged that six members of the shadow cabinet used their office expenses to pay their party more than £150,000.

Alan Duncan, shadow leader of the House of Commons, paid £42,000 to the Rutland and Melton Conservative Association, while Michael Gove, shadow children's secretary, paid £27,000 to Surrey Heath Conservative Association.

Three Cabinet ministers were also found to have paid tens of thousands of pounds to the Labour Party through their local party associations.

Hilary Benn, the Environment Secretary, paid £30,000 rent to Labour for letting office space from his local constituency party, while John Hutton, the Defence Secretary, claimed a similar amount.

There are fears that the money could be funnelled into general accounts, which could be used to fund campaigning.

According to The Green Book of rules, MPs must avoid arrangements which may give rise to the accusation that money is being diverted for the benefit of a political organisation.

Last night Mr Howard said all office expenses paid to his local Conservative association were just, and that there was "no element of profit or benefit involved".

In September 2004, he claimed for £6,772 for his local association.

In April 2005, he claimed £9,000 for employment costs, telephone, utilities, cleaning, computers and advertising for his surgery.

A year later he claimed £9,000 for the use of the association's premises, insurance and general costs. In 2006-07, he submitted a claim for £9,990. In October 2007, he submitted claims for £4,999, and he claimed the same amount last year.

Last night, Mr Howard said: "All the payments I make to the association are to defray the costs it incurs in providing the services you mention to me. There is no element of profit or benefit involved.

"My association offices are in the centre of Folkestone.

"I hold regular advice centres there and frequently use them for other meetings with constituents and other delegations who wish to see me in my role as Member of Parliament.

"I am assisted in the performance of my duties as a Member of Parliament by the staff employed by my association and of course make use of the computer and other office equipment. The charges for advertising relate entirely to the advertising of my constituency advice centres."

Last week, Mr Duncan said there was a clear distinction between parliamentary and political costs while Mr Benn said he had sent an independent valuation of the rent to the fees office.

Yesterday, it emerged that Mr Howard had claimed more than £17,000 for "gardening services" on his second home allowance in his constituency of Kent.

Charles Hendry used public cash to pay for two servants

Charles Hendry: Mr Hendry is the second senior Conservative found to have claimed public money to pay for domestic staff.

Charles Hendry, the shadow energy and climate change minister, used the money to pay for two servants at his £750,000 farm house in East Sussex over three years.

Mr Hendry, the MP for Wealdon, also owns a £2.56 million town house in Westminster.

Mr Hendry is the second senior Conservative found to have claimed public money to pay for domestic staff. Sir John Butterfill, the MP for Bournemouth West, claimed £17,000 for servants' quarters at his second home.

A contract drawn up by Mr Hendry and submitted to the Commons fees office in September 2004 shows that the staff, a husband and wife, were paid to clean, iron clothes and provide "general support in the garden".

They were paid £737 a month for their work at the farm house, for which Mr Hendry has claimed almost £90,000 in second home expenses over the past four years.

Mr Hendry bought the house in 2000 with his wife, Sallie, for £750,000. He designates it as his "second home" for expenses purposes.

His "main home" is a house in a street in Westminster, which the couple bought in 2002 for £2.56 million, without a mortgage.

They live there with their two children and have since taken out a mortgage on it.

Mr Hendry has also in the past paid his wife to work for him out of public funds.

Among other expenses claims made for his second home, Mr Hendry claimed about £350 in 2004 for pest control services, following infestations of mice, wasps and flies in the property's roof.

Two years later, the MP claimed £75 for the collection of a sample and an analysis by an independent testing laboratory.

Mr Hendry has said the test was for suspected asbestos. "Had it been asbestos, we may have had to leave the property," he said.

In May 2004, Mr Hendry successfully claimed £376 for security work, including the servicing of the farm's CCTV system, despite the bill showing that the work was completed and paid for in September 2003.

The MP has said it was a "legitimate claim" that had not been reimbursed at the time. During the same year, he claimed £380 for electrical work, including some for the room containing his piano.

Mr Hendry said on Monday night the work was on "a plug socket adjacent to the piano... not piano lighting".

Since then Mr Hendry has claimed £1,260 a month for interest on the mortgage of the farm house.

He also claimed hundreds of pounds a month for various other bills, including council tax, water and electricity.

In March 2007, he claimed £1,300 for the installation of a new oil tank and the digging of a trench for the pipe. He also claimed regular £500 bills for fuel oil and £90 a month for window cleaning.

Mr Hendry designates a room in the farm house as an office, which allows him to claim half his home phone and fax bill back on his office expenses.

Mr Hendry has defended the claims for staff.

"I have claimed for some of the costs for that help which was necessary and which related to the house, not the garden," he said.

"I have help in the home and in the garden at my constituency home. I have not claimed for the full cost of this as it seemed proper that I should bear most of these costs personally," he added.

Shailesh Vara claimed £1,500 for costs incurred before he was elected to Parliament

Shailesh Vara seen here with Baroness Thatcher

Shailesh Vara lodged invoices for mortgage interest payments, council tax and cleaning services that covered part of 2005 when he was not yet an MP.

He then used his parliamentary expenses to refurbish his second home – owned solely in the name of his wife – before selling it for a £150,000 profit and buying a £1.2 million house near Westminster. Mr Vara, a solicitor, was a vice-chairman of the Conservative Party before he was elected to represent the seat of North West Cambridgeshire in May 2005.

A year later he submitted an expenses claim, comprising 18 pages, for living costs totalling £22,600.51, after nominating a house in Lewisham, south-east London, as his second home.

However, the Commons fees office noticed that some of the claims related to the first few months of 2005 – before he was elected to Parliament.

His mortgage interest payments were reduced by £1,174.13 as a result, his council tax claims by £139.85 and his cleaning bills by £218 – a total reduction of £1,531.98.

A Commons official wrote on Mr Vara's forms: "Claim reduced – claiming before being a member!"

His file shows that concern was also raised about the fact that only the MP's wife, Beverley Vara, was named on the mortgage statements for the Lewisham home. Rules would have prevented Mr Vara claiming mortgage interest payments on a property that he did not own.

He wrote back to the fees office: "Due to a misunderstanding on the part of our solicitor, he drafted the contract and other documentation only in my wife's name."

Mr Vara was allowed to carry on claiming on the Lewisham property as he said he and his wife were about to buy a new flat nearer to Parliament.

He was reimbursed £140 for removing rubbish from the old house as well as £1,320 for painting the kitchen and bathroom ceilings, repairing cracks in the walls and floorboards, putting up new curtains and fitting child safety gates. The following year he claimed £14,173 for mortgage interest on his Lewisham home.

In February 2007, he and his wife sold the house, which they had bought in July 2003 for £320,000, for £470,000.

They went on to buy a four-storey town house in central London for £1.2 million and, after naming it as his second home he claimed £6,264 on the new mortgage.

Since then he has only claimed for mortgage interest payments, totalling £22,839.

Earlier this month, Mr Vara told his local paper that he had nothing to hide. In a statement last night, he said: "It is not true that I attempted to claim for the wrong period.

"I put the correct dates on the claim form but did not pro-rata the bills and the fees office then correctly did the pro-rata exercise and the correct amount was paid to me.

He added, "The house was our matrimonial home and the name on the deeds and bills does not alter the reality that the ownership, responsibility and payments were joint.

"Necessary repairs of £1,320 fourteen months before sale can hardly be said to generate a windfall in the sale price, whilst the purchase of the second property was certainly not dependent on any previous claims."

Humfrey Malins claimed £58,000 for flat in which his children lived

Humfrey Malins said that he spent two nights a week at the flat in Westminster while Parliament was sitting. Based on his second home claims, this represents an average cost to the taxpayer of £240 per night. A night in a top five-star London hotel costs about £250.

Neighbours who The Daily Telegraph spoke to yesterday said that they had never met the MP, who has served as a shadow home affairs minister, but were familiar with his children, Katherine, 26, and her younger brother Harry.

Both Mr Malins’s children have worked as his parliamentary assistants, and his wife, Lynda, is his part-time secretary. The MP admitted that his daughter, who worked for a firm based a few minutes’ walk from the flat in Victoria, “stayed there a great deal,” but added: “My daughter did not make it her permanent full-time home — as with many children of that age she tended to be all over the place.”

Miss Malins’s name appears on a television licence which the MP submitted as part of his expense claims in 2004. Throughout his daughter’s stays, Mr Malins claimed a second home discount on his council tax; this is granted only when no one lives in a property full time.

After Miss Malins left the flat to live with her boyfriend, the MP’s son began to stay at the property, also rent-free.

Mr Malins said that he had recently decided to stop claiming second home expenses, and so was permitting Harry to live there full time. In the past five years, the MP has claimed more than £20,000 on his parliamentary expenses for furnishing and renovating the flat, a small two-bedroom property. The work included a new bathroom costing £6,335, rewiring for £5,824, double glazing which cost £1,639 and a £4 lavatory brush set.

He said that all of the claims were “proper and reasonable”.

A neighbour said: “He did huge renovations, it was a full scale overhaul. I wanted to use the same guy but his prices were too high.”

The neighbour, who confirmed that she had never met Mr Malins, added: “Katherine left last year to live with the boyfriend and it was empty for a few months.

“Their post was often left in the tray, every now and then someone would come and pick it up. Harry has been here a few months.”

Mr Malins’s files show that he engaged in regular correspondence with the fees office about the property.

In 2004, he wrote explaining that he was submitting a claim for £1,400 for unpaid water bills dating back to 2001, when his flat had been let by a tenant.

He said: “Dreadful tenant [redacted] left — I’m responsible: for water rates since July 01 but they never sent me a bill at all. Perhaps I should have noticed but I never did!”

The following year, after an exchange of letters about his desire to install a £6,000 bathroom, he is said to have telephoned to “rant” at officials.

Mr Malins said: “During the years mentioned I have stayed overnight in London on countless occasions especially when there was a late vote followed by an early morning meeting."

“I estimate that I stayed in London on average twice a week, when it was necessary to do so, and occasionally even more. In the recesses I rarely stayed in London."

“Katherine did not live there full-time but stayed there for some periods.

“My son has been an infrequent stayer at the flat and did not live there in the sense implied."

“I told the fees office in writing that I was making no more claims on the ACA and accordingly I am permitting my son to stay in the flat with effect from a week ago."

“I believe my conduct has been perfectly proper throughout."

Christopher Fraser says that claim for trees was necessary

Christopher Fraser feeds his pigs Napoleon, Clarissa and Henrietta as his goats, Horace and Jasper, look on.

Mr Fraser used the money to buy 140 cherry laurels and 75 red cedars for his £350,000 house in his South West Norfolk constituency, which he designates as his “second home”.

Mr Fraser also lives on a farm worth £1.2 million in Dorset, where he was an MP between 1997 and 2001, before being voted out and re-elected to the Norfolk seat four years later. He designates the farmhouse in Dorset as his “main home”, while letting out a smaller farmhouse on the same estate and the surrounding land. He also rents out another property in London. Despite neither of his designated properties being in the capital, Mr Fraser told his local newspaper last week: “For a politician outside London, a second property is a necessity, not a luxury.”

The MP made the claim for trees worth £933 and fencing worth £875 in February, 2007. It was initially challenged by the Commons fees office. An official approved the claim after speaking to the MP over the phone. “This is a property without any natural boundaries,” the official wrote in an email. “Mr Fraser felt that in order to provide security and privacy, fences and hedges were required.” Mr Fraser said yesterday that the fees office had agreed the measures were “a necessity”.

“There were occasions when I found people and dogs in the garden,” he said.

Between being elected in May, 2005, and October, 2006, he rented another farmhouse in the constituency for £1,200 a month, the cost of which he claimed back on expenses.

He also claimed £240 for a lawnmower and £70 for the emptying of his “sceptic (sic) tank”. He said: “I purchased the cheapest lawnmower that I could find, and cut the grass myself to save costs.”

Mr Fraser then bought his current “second home”, and made an emergency claim. Officials noted that he “needs money urgently”.

He began claiming £1,573 a month for the interest on his new mortgage, along with the house’s £518 fuel oil bill, £128 a month council tax bill and other charges.

Among other claims in 2007 was another £80 for “sceptic tank emptying”.

Mr Fraser said: “I have been conscious whenever claiming that my costs must be wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred for the purposes of my parliamentary duties.”

Christopher Fraser

Job: Conservative MP for South West Norfolk

Salary: £64,766

Total second home claims:

2005-06: £21,634

2006-07: £22,111

2007-08: £23,022

Henry Bellingham claimed £1,500 mortgage interest

Henry Bellingham claimed £1,500 mortgage interest per month for a flat in London. Mr Bellingham claimed a total of £85,845 in four years under the addional costs allowance.

Henry Bellingham, Conservative MP for North West Norfolk, said he fully understood public anger over some MPs' abuse of expenses claims and said the system needed to be rebuilt “brick by brick” in the wake of the scandal.

Mr Bellingham became the latest Norfolk MP to release details of his expenses claims from April 2004 to March 2008.

They show that over the four years, he was claiming an average of nearly £1,400 a month in mortgage interest payments on his London house, but that he made no claims for furniture or luxury items.

He said: “I would like to say straight away that I can fully understand the sense of anger, dismay and disbelief over the way in which some MPs have abused the system.

“Obviously this has done a huge amount of damage to public confidence in parliament and our democratic system. Having said that, I do believe that the overwhelming majority of us are hard-working MPs who have not only abided by the letter of our allowances, but also the spirit of them as well.”

Mr Bellingham, who has been MP for North West Norfolk since 2001 and previously represented the constituency from 1983 to 1997, said he had never “flipped” his allowance between homes in order to claim extra payments.

He said: “As far as Emma [his wife] and I are concerned our main home is in west Norfolk, because this is where we spend most of our time, and I also pride myself on being a local man.”

A second home was essential since it was “almost impossible” to commute to London daily from Norfolk, and hotel costs or renting would be no cheaper than his monthly mortgage interest, he added.

And he said he had claimed “slightly less” than he had actually spent on utility bills, council tax, food and cleaning over the four-year period.

Documents show Mr Bellingham, who has a majority of 9,180, claimed up to £1,750 a month to cover mortgage interest payments.

These amounts varied but were always a round figure, as were all his other claims.

Mr Bellingham said they related to his family's house in Stockwell, south London, on which he had a “pretty big” mortgage of £320,000.

“There's a limit to what you can claim on the allowance, which this year is £24,000 and the previous year was about £22,000. If I claimed the whole lot I would be over the limit, so it was a way of keeping below,” he said.

“I worked out a monthly figure that would actually be slightly lower than the actual amount. By averaging it out it helps with one's cash-flow. The fees office was quite happy about that.”

The figures show Mr Bellingham claimed an average of £288.75 a month for food at his second home, below the maximum allowance of £400 a month. He said his average claim had been for about £7.50 per day the Commons sat.

Mr Bellingham said his total expenses claim, including staff and office costs, of £140,539 for 2007-08 were one of the smallest for any large rural constituency and put him 412th out of 645 MPs.

Best Excuse's!

Andrew MacKay, who resigned as a Commons aide to David Cameron, the Tory leader after claiming his MP wife’s “second home” was his “main home”:

"This was all transparent, it was all approved and frankly until it was drawn to my attention it did not occur to me that it didn't pass the reasonableness test. Looking back now, it does look strange, I have clearly made an error of judgment for which I profusely apologise and I've done what I think is the right thing."

Robert Walter's claim for rugs bought in India

Robert Walter: The MP claimed £85,000 in four years for his home in Dorset after switching his second home designation from a property in London

Mr Walter bought the carpets to furnish his constituency home while on a visit with fellow Tories, paid for by the Indian government and the Confederation of Indian Industry.

Although the fees office knocked him back for the full amount, it agreed to pay him £600. The MP claimed £85,000 in four years for his home in Dorset after switching his second home designation from a property in London. The total claimed on his additional costs allowance (ACA) includes £16,790 in removal bills, solicitors’ fees, stamp duty and estate agency commission when he moved five miles from his home in Gillingham to his new £395,000 home in Shaftesbury in 2004.

In addition to a £1,200 monthly mortgage interest bill for his Shaftesbury home, he also claimed for gardening, pot plants, cleaning, gas and electricity.

His claims under the incidental expenses provision, which is designed to cover office costs, included receipts for two Marks & Spencer’s Choc Sundaes, an Exquisite Sundae from Morrisons and a Creme Egg bar costing 47p, which he said had been consumed by “unpaid post graduate interns who work on my staff”. An analysis by The Sunday Telegraph found Mr Walter was among those MPs who deliver the least value for money. He claimed £133,000 in expenses, including travel, home, office and staffing costs, in 2007/08, took part in just 36 per cent of votes, spoke in eight debates and submitted 11 written questions.

Mr Walter said that in 1997, when he was elected, his principal home was a farm in Devon and he had designated London as his “second” home.

A widower, he remarried in September 2000 and sold the farm two years later, deciding with his new wife to make London their principal home.

He said: “I designated my constituency home as my second home. In the year in which I claimed removal expenses I made no claim for council tax, utility bills or any other maintenance charges.’’

Robert Walter

Job: Conservative MP for North Dorset

Salary: £64,766

Total second home claims

2004-05: £20,902

2005-06: £19,871

2006-07: £22,095

2007-08: £22,496

Total expenses 2007-08: £133,170

Rate of attendance at votes: 36 per cent.

Best Excuse's!

David Willetts, shadow schools secretary, who claimed to have 25 light bulbs replaced:

"We had problems with our lighting system which had caused many lights to fuse and needed the attention of an electrician."

Best Excuse's!

John Gummer, former Conservative agriculture minister who claimed for a mole catcher:

"I have only ever claimed the relevant proportion of the costs of necessary maintenance and repairs of an old rural property.”