Westminster four named by prosecutors
Three Labour MPs and one Tory peer charged with criminal offences over allegedly fraudulent expenses claims
Also In The News
|
By Alistair Potter. |  |
Friday, 05, Feb 2010 05:17
By Matthew Champion.
The crown prosecution service has revealed the names of three MPs and one peer who will face charges over allegedly fraudulent expenses claims.
Labour MPs Elliot Morley, Jim Devine and David Chaytor, as well as Conservative peer Lord Hanningfield have been charged with 13 charges under section 17 of the Theft Act 1968 for false accounting.
Keir Starmer, director of public prosecutions (DPP) at the crown prosecution service, told journalists that there was insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction for the fifth individual under review, named as Labour peer Lord Clarke of Hampstead.
The sixth and final file handed to prosecutors in December was still subject to a criminal investigation and the individual in question was not named.
Confirmation of the charges comes a day after auditor Sir Thomas Legg published his long-awaited report into expenses system on Thursday.
After studying all claims made by MPs between 2004 and 2008, Sir Thomas ordered £1.12 million to be repaid, accusing members of parliament of fostering a "culture of deference".
In May 15th 2009 Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson set up a panel of senior police officers and lawyers to consider whether a criminal investigation should be launched into fraudulent parliamentary expenses claims.
Following a "careful and detailed" investigation six files were handed over to the CPS in December, with Mr Starmer today revealing that in four cases there was "sufficient evidence to bring criminal charges and in the public interest to charge the individuals concerned".
Scunthorpe MP Mr Morley has been charged with two offences under section 17 of the Theft Act 1968 for false accounting.
It is alleged that between April 2004 and February 2006 he dishonestly claimed mortgage expenses of £14,428 in excess of what he was entitled to receive. The second charge alleges that between March 2006 and November 2007 he dishonestly claimed mortgage expenses of £16,000 for the same property when there was no longer a mortgage on that property.
Bury North MP Mr Chaytor was charged with three offences under the same Act. The first alleges that in May 2006 he dishonestly claimed £1,950 for IT services via false invoices. The second claims that between September 2005 and September 2006 he dishonestly claimed £12,925, purportedly for renting a property in London's Regency Street when he was in fact the owner of the property. The third charge alleges that between September 2007 and January 2008 Mr Chaytor dishonestly claimed £5,425 purportedly for renting a property in Bury, Lancashire, which was owned by his mother.
Mr Devine, MP for Livingston, is charged with two offences under section 17 of the Theft Act 1968 for false accounting.
The first alleges that between July 2008 and April 2009 he dishonestly claimed £3,240 for cleaning services involving false invoices. The second charge alleges that in March 2009 he dishonesty claimed £5,505 for stationery using false invoices.
A joint statement released by the MPs said they were "extremely disappointed" to see charges, which they "totally refute", being brought against them.
They added that they believed the case should be settled by the parliamentary commissioner.
The fourth individual subject to criminal charges under the same Act is Paul White, otherwise known as Lord Hanningfield. The charges against the Tory peer allege that between March 2006 and May 2009 he dishonestly submitted claims for expenses for which he knew he was not entitled, including "numerous" claims for overnight expenses for staying in London when records apparently show he was driven home and did not stay in the capital.
Mr Starmer claimed that although there was insufficient evidence to charge the fifth individual identified by the police investigation it was still in the public interest to identify him as Lord Clarke of Hampstead.
"Since criminal proceedings are now active in respect of the four individuals charged, it would not be appropriate for me to comment further on Lord Clarke's case at this stage," he said.
The DPP went on to say: "The sixth case is still under consideration and the criminal investigation is ongoing.
"Lawyers representing those who have been charged have raised with us the question of Parliamentary privilege. We have considered that question and concluded that the applicability and extent of any parliamentary privilege claimed should be tested in court.
"Can I remind all concerned that the four individuals now stand charged of criminal offences and they each have the right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that nothing should be reported which could prejudice any of these trials."