Culture Secretary to repay £1,000's and apologise over expenses claims

Maria Miller 'to have to repay thousands of pounds and apologise over expenses claims'
Culture Secretary to be censured for abusing parliamentary expenses system after overclaiming for her mortgage and making £1m profit on sale
An investigation by The Daily Telegraph in 2012 found Mrs Miller claimed more than £90,000 over four years for a second home where her parents lived in South London
An investigation by The Daily Telegraph in 2012 found Mrs Miller claimed more than £90,000 over four years for a second home where her parents lived in South London Photo: GETTY IMAGES
Christopher Hope By Christopher Hope, Holly Watt and Claire Newell10:00PM GMT 28 Mar 2014
The Culture Secretary abused the Parliamentary expenses system by over-claiming for her mortgage and then failing to fully co-operate with an investigation into her conduct, The Telegraph can disclose.
Maria Miller, the Culture secretary, is set to have to repay up to £5,000 and be censured for her claims - following an official Parliamentary inquiry which is expected to report as soon as this week.
It can also be disclosed that Mrs Miller has recently sold the south London house at the centre of the scandal for a profit of more than £1million.
The Cabinet minister, who has previously been supported by David Cameron, is expected to come under intense pressure to resign when the results of the official inquiry are made public.
The Prime Minister will be loathed to lose the state-school educated female member of his Government but any minister found to have abused the Parliamentary expenses system is likely to be seen as a major electoral liability.
One Conservative source said: “We simply cannot have a member of the Cabinet found to have abused the expenses system in any way this close to vital elections.”
Parliamentary authorities first launched an inquiry into Mrs Miller’s claims more than a year ago following an investigation by The Telegraph.
She was exposed after claiming more than £90,000 over four years for a second home where her parents lived in South London - rather than submitting claims for cottages she rented in her Basingstoke constituency.
The Parliamentary Commissioner is understood to have concluded that the arrangement did not lead to Mrs Miller benefiting financially. However, the Commissioner is unlikely to have been aware of the seven-figure profit made in recent weeks by the minister.
Mr and Mrs Miller sold the large house in Wimbledon for £1.47 million on Valentine’s Day of this year. They originally bought the house for £234,000 – which means the house value increased by £1,236,000.
Between 2005 and 2009, she claimed £90,718, which was only £115 less than the total amount she could have claimed. Although the house only cost £234,000 in 1995, the Millers took out a large mortgage against the house – and claimed the interest on the mortgage from the taxpayer.
In November 2007, they increased the mortgage from £525,000 to £575,000. The rules state that MPs could only increase their mortgages to pay the costs of necessary improvements – and that these should be signed off with the parliamentary authorities.
The Parliamentary inquiry discovered that Mrs Miller over-claimed for her mortgage and so should repay around £5,000 to the expenses watchdog.
The over-payment is understood to have occurred because Mrs Miller did not adjust her claims downward claims for mortgage as interest rates fell during the period under investigation.
The Telegraph also understands that the MPs want Mrs Miller to apologise to Parliament for not co-operating in a “timely manner” with the Commissioner.
MPs who sit on the standards committee are thought to be waiting for more financial information to consider at their next meeting on Tuesday before finalising the penalty to be imposed on Mrs Miller.
The MPs are frustrated that they have had to wait for months for basic financial details about the amount of money she over-claimed.
The Parliamentary report is understood to contain a memorandum which details the various attempts made by investigators seeking Mrs Miller’s mortgage details.
One source said: "If she had just said sorry she would be in a much stronger position. It will be a question of embarrassment and if she showed the best judgment.
"It is about how much the committee can establish she might have received in error because of the crash in the interest rates."
The report will heap huge pressure on Mrs Miller. The affair has prompted comparisons with Tony McNulty, a former Home Office Minister, who resigned after he was reprimanded for letting his parents live in his taxpayer-funded second home.
Once the report is agreed it is then shown to Mrs Miller who is given a short time to prepare a response or a statement, which is published by the committee.
A final report could be published as early as Thursday next week and almost certainly by April 10 - when the House rises for its Easter break.
The Standards committee can recommend that an MP is suspended for serious breaches, as well as a repayment of money, an apology or a personal statement.
The findings of the committee are still draft only and will need to be voted through by MPs on the committee before they are finalised.
A source close to Mrs Miller said: "Maria has co-operated fully with the inquiry, asked for by the Labour Party, which has now been going on for a year and a half amidst constant unfounded speculation. We hope it will conclude soon."

============================================

I think any MP who fiddles expenses should be sacked, if this woman was working for a Company or Bank she would be charged.

Why isn´t this woman in prison, along with all the other fraudsters in the government?

mara thon wrote:Why isn´t this woman in prison, along with all the other fraudsters in the government?

I agree mara_thon this makes us realise just how corrupt and ineffectual Government is , I bet a few extreme Parties are elected come the election because there is no one worth voting for . Britain has one of the worst voting record for General Elections, only 45% voted last time.!!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/conservative-mps-expenses/10740047/Maria-Miller-expenses-report-David-Cameron-has-full-confidence-in-Culture Sec


How can Cameron defend her????

Someone who claims more in benefits than they are entitled to is a thief, but an MP who claims more than entitled to in expenses is allowed to apologize! Brilliant!

AnnaEsse wrote:Someone who claims more in benefits than they are entitled to is a thief, but an MP who claims more than entitled to in expenses is allowed to apologize! Brilliant!

I know AnnaEsse, it makes me sick that that Politicians get away with it, Cameron is nailing his own political coffin .

AnnaEsse wrote:Someone who claims more in benefits than they are entitled to is a thief, but an MP who claims more than entitled to in expenses is allowed to apologize! Brilliant!

Exactly! She should be sanctioned in some way. Sponging off the British public   

fleetstreetfox ‏@fleetstreetfox 15m

Those Maria Miller facts in full: Independent standards commissioner found she'd diddled £45k. Committee of 10 MPs say it's £5,800.

chrissie wrote:fleetstreetfox ‏@fleetstreetfox 15m

Those Maria Miller facts in full: Independent standards commissioner found she'd diddled £45k. Committee of 10 MPs say it's £5,800.

I saw a bit about that yesterday chrissie. Apparently , the house was occupied by her Parents so there was no charge I wonder if that was true??? Anyway, she owes £5,000 and had Camerons' backing, what more can we say?

To say, 'one law for us and another for them' would be understating the case...

A more fitting test would be for ATOS to assess her guilt. Given that they found a comatose woman fit to work, Maria Miller would be found guilty as charged and probably hung drawn and quartered.

malena stool wrote:To say, 'one law for us and another for them' would be understating the case...

A more fitting test would be for ATOS to assess her guilt. Given that they found a comatose woman fit to work, Maria Miller would be found guilty as charged and probably hung drawn and quartered.

For Cameron to make a statement that this MP would not be charged is gross intervention , he is more worried that if Mary had to resign a by election could lose him a Conservative seat, he really is desperate.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/conservative-mps-expenses/10741967/David-Cameron-under-pressure-to-sack-Maria-Miller-over-expenses-claims.html


What a fraud he is....preaching to the populace yet supporting an MP who should have resigned , wrong move Cameron, if Parliament insists that Miller resign , Cameron will be a liability to the Tory Party and the backbenchers will have their knves sharpened.

Cameron is displaying complete lack of judgement again in his selection of ministers, although they are all guilty of theft from the public purse, fraud and lying.

He is also guilty of crass poor judgement by standing by them when they are discovered.

This country and its people, once the envy of the world for its honest and hard working politicians, considered the Gold Standard of Truth and Fairness is now the world's laughing stock, shown to be less honourable and its politicians less respected than that of a 3rd world banana republic.

Cameron, like his opposite number in New Labour, Miliband, can pose and pout, but the facts speak for themselves. The entire House is full to the gunnels of jailbait.

MPs close ranks for Miller
 
A 30-SECOND APOLOGY

Maria Miller, the Culture Secretary, is facing a growing battle to keep her Cabinet job after she was forced to "unreservedly" apologise for her "attitude" during an inquiry into her expenses claims.

In a 31-second statement in the Commons today, Mrs Miller claimed the matter is now at “an end” despite the standards watchdog censuring her, following an investigation of her use of the taxpayer-funded second home allowance. (As predicted, she was asked to pay back £5,800.)

David Cameron has insisted that Mrs Miller's job is safe despite her being accused of providing "incomplete documentation and fragmentary information" to the inquiry.

Here is Peter Oborne's reaction to that:
Mr Cameron has failed the test. There is no doubt at all that the Prime Minister should have insisted that Mrs Miller step down as a Cabinet minister. Instead he has thrown a protective ring around her.


NB: There is a marked contrast between the verdict of the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner and that of the MPs on the  standards committee. The Commissioner, Kathryn Hudson, said that the home Mrs Miller overclaimed for should have been designated as her main residence. But MPs on the standards committee decided that the Culture Secretary's designation was "reasonable in the light of the guidance available at the time".

To voters, it may look suspiciously as if MPs are closing ranks to protect one of their own. In other words, it's all a bit 2009.

malena , what happened in 2009?

Panda wrote:MPs close ranks for Miller
 
A 30-SECOND APOLOGY

Maria Miller, the Culture Secretary, is facing a growing battle to keep her Cabinet job after she was forced to "unreservedly" apologise for her "attitude" during an inquiry into her expenses claims.

In a 31-second statement in the Commons today, Mrs Miller claimed the matter is now at “an end” despite the standards watchdog censuring her, following an investigation of her use of the taxpayer-funded second home allowance. (As predicted, she was asked to pay back £5,800.)

David Cameron has insisted that Mrs Miller's job is safe despite her being accused of providing "incomplete documentation and fragmentary information" to the inquiry.

Here is Peter Oborne's reaction to that:
Mr Cameron has failed the test. There is no doubt at all that the Prime Minister should have insisted that Mrs Miller step down as a Cabinet minister. Instead he has thrown a protective ring around her.


NB: There is a marked contrast between the verdict of the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner and that of the MPs on the  standards committee. The Commissioner, Kathryn Hudson, said that the home Mrs Miller overclaimed for should have been designated as her main residence. But MPs on the standards committee decided that the Culture Secretary's designation was "reasonable in the light of the guidance available at the time".

To voters, it may look suspiciously as if MPs are closing ranks to protect one of their own. In other words, it's all a bit 2009.

malena , what happened in 2009?

The Expenses Scandal, Panda....
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=the+expenses+scandal+2009&rlz=1C1GGGE_en-gbGB441GB505&oq=the+expenses+scandal&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0l5.10011j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8

Is this the women that payed off her mortgage using expenses....£230,000....on her second home .....then sold it for £1.2m?




Making .....1m profit.

kitti wrote:Is this the women that payed off her mortgage using expenses....£230,000....on her second home .....then sold it for £1.2m?




Making .....1m profit.

Hi kitti.
In 2009 she was claiming on top of her £64,766 per year salary.

£17,838.  Mortgage for 2nd home in South London.
£    580.  Food.
£    477.  Crockery.
£    244.  Crockery. (2nd claim).
£  4,582.  ACA. (Additional Cost Allowance)..
---------
£23,721.

She, like all other MPs could claim for utility bills, council tax, telephone bills, cleaners service, maintenance, furniture, electrical goods and household goods for her second home. The allowance for a TV was capped at £750, a bed capped at £1000, and carpeting at £35. per square metre. TV licences can be claimed for as can Sky subscriptions. Expense claims can be made for employing office staff, travel and office running costs.

I bought and kept the Daily Telegraph Complete Expense Files ... It exposed our 'Honourable Members' with few exceptions, as being bigger criminals than Ronnie Biggs or the Krays.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
See also: Salaries of Members of the United Kingdom Parliament and List of expenses claims in the United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal


The Palace of Westminster
The United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal was a major political scandal triggered by the leak and subsequent publication by the Telegraph Group in 2009 of expense claims made by members of the United Kingdom Parliament over several years.[1] Public outrage was caused by disclosure of widespread actual and alleged misuse of the permitted allowances and expenses claimed by Members of Parliament (MPs), following failed attempts by parliament to prevent disclosure under Freedom of Information legislation. The scandal aroused widespread anger among the UK public against MPs and a loss of confidence in politics. It resulted in a large number of resignations, sackings, de-selections and retirement announcements, together with public apologies and the repayment of expenses. Several members or former members of the House of Commons, and members of the House of Lords, were prosecuted and sentenced to terms of imprisonment. The scandal also created pressure for political reform extending well beyond the issue of expenses and led to the Parliament elected in 2005 being referred to as the 'Rotten Parliament'.[2][3][4]

In the United Kingdom MPs can claim expenses, including the cost of accommodation, "wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred for the performance of a Member’s parliamentary duties".[5] A February 2008 Freedom of Information Act request for the release of details of MPs' expenses claims was allowed by an Information Tribunal. The House of Commons Authorities challenged the decision on the grounds that it was "unlawfully intrusive".[6] In May 2008, the High Court (England and Wales) ruled in favour of releasing the details of MPs' expenses claims.[7][8] In April 2009 the House of Commons authorities announced that publication of expenses, with certain information deemed "sensitive" removed,[9] would be made in July 2009.[10]

However before this could take place, a full uncensored copy of the expenses records and documentation was leaked to the Daily Telegraph, which began publishing details in daily instalments from 8 May 2009. These disclosures dominated the British media for weeks, with the findings being considered to show flagrant and sometimes gross misuse of the expenses system for personal gain by many MPs (including Government and shadow cabinet ministers) across all parties.

On 18 June 2009 the details of all MPs' expenses and allowance claims that were approved during the period 2004 to 2008 were published on the official Parliament website. However items of detail such as addresses were redacted, and the publication excluded claims that were not approved for payment by the Commons authorities as well as any correspondence between MPs and the parliamentary fees office. These omissions resulted in further accusations of unnecessary secrecy,[11][12] and widespread assertions that the most serious abuses would not have come to light had the censored documentation been the only information available.[9] Details of voluntary repayments by MPs amounting to almost £500,000 were also officially published.[13]

A panel was established to investigate all claims relating to the second homes allowance between 2004 and 2008. Headed by former civil servant Sir Thomas Legg, the panel published its findings on 12 October as MPs returned to Westminster following the summer recess. Each MP received a letter stating whether or not he or she would be required to repay any expenses claimed.

It was announced on 5 February 2010 that criminal charges would be prosecuted against Labour MPs Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine, and Conservative peer Lord Hanningfield in relation to false accounting.[14] On 11 March all four announced they would plead not guilty to charges of false accounting.[15] Potential cases against other unnamed MPs and Lords are still being considered by the police and the Crown Prosecution Service as of December 2010.

The Crown Prosecution Service announced on 19 May 2010 that Labour MP Eric Illsley would be charged with three counts of false accounting; he was also suspended from the Labour Party. Lord Taylor of Warwick, a Conservative peer, had also been charged with six counts of false accounting. On 13 October 2010 it was announced that former Labour MP Margaret Moran would also be charged with false accounting, while on 14 October 2010 former Minister of State for Europe and Labour MP Denis MacShane was referred to the Police following a complaint from the British National Party, as a consequence of which he was also suspended from the Labour Party.

Three Labour Peers were suspended on 18 October 2010 due to their expenses claims: Lord Bhatia was suspended from the House of Lords for eight months and told to repay £27,446; Lord Paul suspended from the House of Lords for four months and ordered to pay back £41,982 and Baroness Uddin faces a police investigation for alleged fraud for claiming at least £180,000 in expenses by designating an empty flat, and previously an allegedly nonexistent property as her main residence. She was suspended from the House of Lords until the end of 2012 and required to repay £125,349.
=============================================================
Thanks malena.......Cameron must have a thing for the Ladies.....first of all being taken in by Brookes and McCann to order a review  which has cost millions and proved a waste of taxpayers money, now supporting Mary Miller when her evidence to the Committee was questionable.By saying her parents stayed there rent free , seems a poor explanation, I'm surprised Labour hasn't latched on to this.

They probably daren't broach the subject, Panda. They know they are living in a glass house themselves....
Corrupt illigitemates the lot of them..

malena stool wrote:They probably daren't broach the subject, Panda. They know they are living in a glass house themselves....
Corrupt illigitemates the lot of them..

the trouble is malena, there is no Political Party worth voting for , the Lib Dems at one stage were considered less corrupt than the others but they havn't managed over the years to increase the number of seats and Clegg is a lightweight . The Public are fed up and will vote BNP or somesuch radical Party hoping it will change things.

mara thon wrote:Why isn´t this woman in prison, along with all the other fraudsters in the government?

Very good question mara thon. You or I would certainly be. MP's have however sewn themselves a little world of their own, in which they are invincilble, until voting day, and you never know, they may possibly get re-elected.

The most interesting part is that labour are not pursuing it. I wonder if that is because it almost certainly would backfire when it comes out that they are at it as well.

I thought the rules were changed to make it not impossible to fiddle, but so difficult that they wouldn't bother. This is obviously not the case .they've simply got more creative in the "genuine errors" they make with their expenses claims. I mean I believe them all to be genuine errors, but then I am overdue for medication today

AnnaEsse wrote:Someone who claims more in benefits than they are entitled to is a thief, but an MP who claims more than entitled to in expenses is allowed to apologize! Brilliant!

Good afternoon Anna Esse. We also have to bear in mind that she was originally ordered to pay back £45k. That is an amount that many people do not earn in a year and those having to rely on food banks can only dream about.

It was a committee of MP's who reduced it to a fraction of that. Of course they can't, indeed daren't do much else. If the whole sordid truth were known the panel of MP's are up to their dirty necks in it, and the possibility of it backfiring are too great. how would it look if one of them voted to make her pay the lot back, and then the next week were found to be equally as guilty of fraud.

That is what it is, fraud, and fraud on a grand and systematic scale. We've had the long Parliament the short parliament in the past. This crew I suspect will go down in history as the thieves parliament.

I only hope that come the next general election, the voting public remembers and votes accordingly for £None of the above" they are all tarred with the same brush.

Yes.....same greedy woman






Miller in '£1m house sale profit'

Press Association – Sat, Mar 29, 2014

View Photo
Press Association - Culture Secretary Maria Miller is said to have made a profit of more than £1m from the sale of a home at the centre of an expenses-probe investigation
Culture Secretary Maria Miller made a profit of more than £1 million on a property at the centre of an investigation into her use of taxpayer-funded expenses, it is reported.

The Commons Standards Committee is considering the Cabinet minister's claims under the second home allowance in relation to the property in Wimbledon, south-west London.

The Daily Telegraph reported that the house, which Mrs Miller and her husband bought for £234,000 in 1995, was sold on Valentine's Day this year for £1.47 million.

A source close to the Culture Secretary said: "It is not surprising that London houses go up in value well over a decade after they are first bought . It is also not unusual for people to move house."

Mrs Miller claimed second home allowances of £90,718 - almost the maximum permitted - between 2005 and 2009 towards mortgage payments, bills and other costs relating to the house.

The cross-party Standards Committee has yet to produce its long-awaited report into Mrs Miller's claims.

A statement on the committee's website said no further announcement on the ma tter was expected before Wednesday,April 2 "at the earliest".

The probe into Mrs Miller's expenses was launched in December 2012 by then p arliamentary standards commissioner John Lyon, following a complaint from Labour MP John Mann.

The source said: "Maria has co-operated fully with the inquiry, asked for by the Labour Party, which has now been going on for a year and a half amidst constant unfounded speculation. We hope it will conclude soon."

All of them are at it, whatever their party. Years ago they used to be able to claim obvious expenses but never on a scale like this. When did this claiming expenses on a grand scale start? It smells of the Blair years to me.

fuzeta wrote:All of  them are at it, whatever their party.  Years ago they used to be able to claim obvious expenses but never on a scale like this.  When did this claiming expenses on a grand scale start?  It smells of the Blair years to me.

Yes fuzeta, Blair had 13 years to destroy all the ethics Government should have , did we know what spin was until he employed a spin Doctor? As soon as he was in power he dismissed the daily briefings new MP's have with the Civil Servants , did you ever watch Yes Minister?? It was hilarious . He made
Mandelson a Lord when Mandelson had been caught out in expenses fraud. Twice Blair was supposed to go before Parliament for lying but he never did.