Public would be appalled if MP’s in expenses scandal used a law from 1689 to avoid court proceedings
MPs at the centre of the expense claims scandal have been warned not to use Parliamentary privilege to avoid court proceedings by the Leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg.
The crown prosecution service yesterday 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 were charged with 13 charges under section 17 of the Theft Act 1968 for false accounting.
If found guilty the four politicians face a maximum sentence of seven years’ imprisonment.
In a joint statement, the three Labour MPs, who have been barred from standing as Labour candidates in the general election, said:
“We totally refute any charges that we have committed an offence and we will defend our position robustly.
“We maintain that this is an issue that should be resolved by the parliamentary commissioner who is there to enforce any breach of the rules.”
Announcing the decision to press charges on Friday, the Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer addressed the issue of Parliamentary privilege.
“Lawyers representing those who have been charged have raised with us the question of Parliamentary privilege,” he said.
“We have considered that question and concluded that the applicability and extent of any Parliamentary privilege claimed should be tested in court.”
Nick Clegg told the BBC that the public would be “appalled” if the MPs invoked a right going back to 1689.
“Lawmakers should not be above the law and they should not be invoking 17th century conventions in order to avoid paying their expenses”.
Nick Clegg also said Britain had a “rotten system of party funding”,” and alarm bells should be ringing about “a political culture where more people didn’t vote in the last two elections than voted for the winning party”.

