A Norfolk MP has said he is “happy” for details of his London rental home to be published by the parliamentary expenses watchdog because there is nothing untoward about them.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

Earlier this week the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA), set up in the wake of the expenses scandal, published a list of who MPs rented their second homes from.

It showed that Broadland MP Keith Simpson rented his flat from Howard Flight, a former MP who is now in the House of Lords.

Mr Simpson said: “From my perspective it has been completely transparent, and I’m quite happy to have this information in the public domain.”

Meanwhile, details of who Norwich North MP Chloe Smith and South East Cambridgeshire MP Jim Paice rented from were ‘redacted’, blocked from being released, for security reasons.

Members of Parliament whose constituencies are outside London are given state funding to pay for a second home, allowing them to do their job both in the capital and in their constituency.

Under rule changes IPSA introduced, MPs were stopped from claiming for mortgage interest, and only permitted to rent a property using their parliamentary allowance.

But concerns were raised recently when it appeared some MPs might be renting from other MPs, who were then in turn claiming money for a property in the capital too.

The list of MPs’ landlords put out by IPSA showed two Labour MPs were renting to other MPs; Mr Simpson pointed out that his situation was different.

He said: “I’ve always rented a flat; I initially rented elsewhere, but decided it was too big for my requirements and decided I wanted to go closer to Parliament.

“So I started to look for a flat a short walking distance away, and someone told me Howard Flight, who already owns and lives in a house in London, also owned a single room flat that was available.

“It was ideal, so I put it up to the parliamentary authorities and they looked at the contract and it was passed. Howard Flight had already stood down [from Parliament] in 2005 and wasn’t an MP, and he wasn’t a peer until 2010.”

Mr Simpson explained that when IPSA was established it called in all rental contracts for MPs’ flats and that his had again been passed without any problems.

He added: “If [Mr Flight] wasn’t renting it to me he would rent it to someone else; from my point of view if I didn’t live there I would still have to live in a flat elsewhere in London, so it wouldn’t make any difference to the taxpayer.”

Meanwhile Ms Smith explained that she did not rent from another MP. She said: “I rent a flat in London from a commercial landlord.

“It so happens that the name of the landlord identifies the street address of the property and I do not think it’s right to run the risk of potentially being identified as living at that address.

“I entered Parliament in a by-election closely linked to the expenses scandal and have always been absolutely above board in the expenses I have claimed since coming in to the job.”

Explaining why the name of his landlord was redacted, Mr Paice said: “My landlords are a private couple who only own one property in London and therefore it would be very easy for my address to be discovered [if the landlord was identified].

“To the very best of my knowledge they have no relationship with Parliament.”

7 comments

  • Keith Simpsons Landlord Lord Flight voted strongly against the hunting ban whereas Keith only voted moderately against it, thus confirming that Lord Flight is not exerting undue influence on his tenants voting in parliament.

    Report this comment

    Rhombus

    Wednesday, November 21, 2012

  • Sorry Keith did vote strongly against a fox hunting ban, but that was before he became Lord Flight's tenant, so no undue influence there.

    Report this comment

    Rhombus

    Wednesday, November 21, 2012

  • Who was it who said "Politicians and nappies should be changed frequently and all for the same reason?

    Report this comment

    John L Norton

    Wednesday, November 21, 2012

  • This is the same Tory example as it is set out by Suffolks PCC, personal enrichment at any price. legality does not come into this despicable behaviour, as if MP's did not have enough perks, as if they are not desperate to hide their ever increasing take from the taxpayer. What has happened to the reform and cuts in both Houses, did the pigs refuse to fly by? It is as lega as the tax avoidance scheme we have gained under the Tory's. Time to boycott tax avoiders and vote out apologists such as keith Simpson.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Wednesday, November 21, 2012

  • Due to legal tax avoidance by multinationals and other corporations this coalition of minority parties will borrow and extra 5 billion more up to the end of this month, so much for Keith legalities.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Wednesday, November 21, 2012

  • This MP takes the biscuit as far as I am concerned. Not only does he disappear on his electorates, gives us false promises at elections but now openly admits to being part of a system to profit other members of parliament. Benefits, oh yes he enjoys a little history book reading. Come the next election Mr Simpson or is that Lord Lucan?

    Report this comment

    Marigold

    Wednesday, November 21, 2012

  • If I remember correctly Mr Simpson avoided giving the EDP and us any response to his expenses at the last debacle due to not giving his staff's personal details away! How convenient.

    Report this comment

    Marigold

    Wednesday, November 21, 2012

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Norfolk Weather

Partly Cloudy

Partly Cloudy

max temp: 11°C

min temp: 12°C

Five-day forecast

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT