Cheltenham MP Comments on Kelly's Expenses Crackdown

Cheltenham MP Martin Horwood has warmly welcomed news that Sir Christopher Kelly's inquiry into MPs' expenses will impose radical changes to the flawed expenses regime. The key recommendation thought to be in the report is the banning of MPs’ claims for mortgage interest on private second homes. In his submission to Sir Christopher Kelly in June, Martin argued strongly that banning mortgage payments would 'at a stroke... prevent all the problems of moats, duck-houses, tennis courts, interior decorators, ‘flipping’, capital gains tax and profiting from public expenditure.' He also argued that, having lost public trust on the whole expenses issue, MPs should accept Kelly's eventual recommendations without question.

Martin said 'If this leak is confirmed, it is excellent news and a real victory for people power and the freedom of the press. I wasn't convinced that Kelly would be this bold in cracking down on the system but if it's true, then I'm delighted. I think this will go a long way to restoring Parliament's reputation by removing any temptation for MPs to claim for private homes. It was a mistake for this loophole to be introduced into the expenses system in the 1980s and it is absolutely right that it should now go. I understand that he is recommending a five year transition period which seems quite generous but I can't imagine many MPs would risk facing their electorate at a second general election while still claiming for an allowance that was being banned.'

Other recommendations apparently to be included in Kelly's report include the banning of any second homes within 60 minutes commuting distance of Parliament and the banning of employment of family members. Martin commented: 'there will be arguments for and against these recommendations, for instance that late night votes might leave some MPs having to claim huge taxi fares or that loyal spouses will effectively be sacked despite doing nothing wrong. It's important that the changes are implemented fairly but the bottom line is that we could have sorted all this out ourselves and we blew it. The public won't tolerate us unpicking the reforms.'