Mrs Caroline Spelman

House of Commons Committee on Standards and Privileges Mrs Caroline Spelman Sixth Report of Session 2008–09 HC 316 House of Commons Committee on Standards and Privileges Mrs Caroline Spelman Sixth Report of Session 2008–09 Report and Appendices, together with formal minutes Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 3 March 2009 HC 316 Published on 3 March 2009 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Committee on Standards and Privileges The Committee on Standards and Privileges is appointed by the House of Commons to oversee the work of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards; to examine the arrangements proposed by the Commissioner for the compilation, maintenance and accessibility of the Register of Members’ Interests and any other registers of interest established by the House; to review from time to time the form and content of those registers; to consider any specific complaints made in relation to the registering or declaring of interests referred to it by the Commissioner; to consider any matter relating to the conduct of Members, including specific complaints in relation to alleged breaches in the Code of Conduct which have been drawn to the Committee’s attention by the Commissioner; and to recommend any modifications to the Code of Conduct as may from time to time appear to be necessary. Current membership Rt Hon Sir George Young Bt MP (Conservative, North West Hampshire) (Chairman) Rt Hon Kevin Barron MP (Labour, Rother Valley) Rt Hon David Curry MP (Conservative, Skipton & Ripon) Mr Andrew Dismore MP (Labour, Hendon) Nick Harvey MP (Liberal Democrat, North Devon) Mr Elfyn Llwyd MP (Plaid Cymru, Meirionnydd Nant Conwy) Mr Chris Mullin MP (Labour, Sunderland South) The Hon Nicholas Soames MP (Conservative, Mid Sussex) Mr Paddy Tipping MP (Labour, Sherwood) Dr Alan Whitehead MP (Labour, Southampton Test) Powers The constitution and powers of the Committee are set out in Standing Order No. 149. In particular, the Committee has power to order the attendance of any Member of Parliament before the committee and to require that specific documents or records in the possession of a Member relating to its inquiries, or to the inquiries of the Commissioner, be laid before the Committee. The Committee has power to refuse to allow its public proceedings to be broadcast. The Law Officers, if they are Members of Parliament, may attend and take part in the Committee’s proceedings, but may not vote. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at: www.parliament.uk/sandp. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Mr Steve Priestley (Clerk), Mrs Sarah Hartwell-Naguib (Second Clerk) and Ms Jane Cooper (Committee Assistant). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to The Clerk of the Committee on Standards and Privileges, Journal Office, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6615. Mrs Caroline Spelman 1 Contents Report Page Mrs Caroline Spelman 3 Introduction 3 The allegation 3 The Commissioner’s investigation 3 The Commissioner’s memorandum 4 Conclusion 7 Some relevant considerations 7 Points made by Mrs Spelman 8 Overall conclusion 9 Child care for Members of Parliament 9 Appendix 1: Memorandum from the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards 11 Appendix 2: Letter to the Second Clerk of the Committee from Mrs Caroline Spelman, 23 February, 2009 129 Formal minutes 133 Mrs Caroline Spelman 3 Mrs Caroline Spelman Introduction 1. On 9 June 2008, Mrs Caroline Spelman, the Member for Meriden, asked the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards to investigate the circumstances of the employment of a member of her staff from 1997 to 1999, following press reports that parliamentary allowances may have been misused. Normally, the Commissioner does not consider cases that go back more than seven years. Neither may the Commissioner launch an investigation in the absence of a complaint, without the express authority of the Committee on Standards and Privileges. Having considered Mrs Spelman’s request, the Commissioner sought the Committee’s agreement for him to accept the referral and to waive the seven-year rule.1 2. On 17 June, the Committee authorised the Commissioner to investigate allegations of misuse by Mrs Spelman of Parliamentary allowances in relation to employment of staff.2 The Commissioner has since carried out his investigation and has reported his findings. These are published as Appendix 1 to this Report. In accordance with our normal practice, we invited Mrs Spelman to send us her observations on the Commissioner’s memorandum. Mrs Spelman’s evidence is published as Appendix 2. The allegation 3. The allegation against Mrs Spelman was first raised in a BBC television report. As the Commissioner notes: In essence, the allegation is that Mrs Spelman subsidised the cost of nannying services out of her parliamentary allowances and that her administration assistant did not undertake secretarial or administrative duties to the extent for which she was paid.3 The Rules of the House require—as they required throughout the period covered by the allegation—that all expenditure from parliamentary allowances should be incurred “wholly, exclusively and necessarily” in connection with a Member’s parliamentary duties.4 The Commissioner’s investigation 4. Over a period of eight months, the Commissioner conducted a most thorough investigation of the allegation referred to him by Mrs Spelman. In the course of this investigation, the Commissioner gathered relevant records and documents (to the extent 1 Appendix 1, paragraph 6 2 Appendix 1, paragraph 6; see also Minutes of Proceedings, Session 2007-08, 17 June 2008, available at www.parliament.uk 3 Appendix 1, paragraph 7 4 Appendix 1, paragraph 10 4 Mrs Caroline Spelman these were still available), obtained statements from a range of witnesses and interviewed several of those most closely concerned. Mrs Spelman has thanked the Commissioner and his staff for their approach to the investigation.5 We wish to add our thanks. There are very good reasons why cases that go back more than seven years are not normally investigated: records are less likely to be retrievable or even to exist at all; and memories fade or become unreliable. In the circumstances, the Commissioner has done a remarkable job in coming to clear conclusions, founded on firm evidence. 5. The Commissioner elected to adopt a high standard of proof in this inquiry. He did so because of the seriousness of the allegations, which called into question Mrs Spelman’s personal integrity, and because of the “very long passage of time” since the events took place.6 The standard of proof adopted was that the allegation should be shown to be significantly more likely to be true than not to be true. We agree with the Commissioner’s decision to adopt this high standard of proof. We have applied the same standard of proof when reaching our own conclusions, as set out later in this Report. The Commissioner’s memorandum 6. The Commissioner has set out his findings of fact at paragraphs 168 to 192 of his memorandum and his conclusions at paragraphs 195 to 217. We summarise them below, but we strongly recommend that all those who read our Report should also read the Commissioner’s memorandum in full. 7. Mrs Spelman was elected to the House in May 1997. She had three young children. She had been assisted in looking after those children by a live-in au pair. Following her election, Mrs Spelman engaged an experienced nanny, Mrs Tina Haynes, to look after her children. Mrs Haynes agreed to Mrs Spelman’s suggestion that she should also act as her part-time constituency administration assistant. Initially, Mrs Haynes moved into the Spelman family home in Kent and, according to the evidence of both Mrs Haynes and Mrs Spelman, she focused on dealing with the backlog of work that had accumulated since the sudden death in February 1997 of the previous Member, Mr Iain Mills, while an au pair continued to provide child care.7 8. The Commissioner notes that: Mrs Haynes moved with the family from Kent to their rented house in Knowle [in the Meriden constituency] in July 1997. The family subsequently moved in October 1997 to a house which they bought nearby, and to a larger house in October 1998. Mrs Haynes took up responsibility as the children’s nanny when the au pair left the family in August 1997. Mrs Haynes had sole care of the children during the working 5 Appendix 2 6 Appendix 1, paragraph 193 7 Appendix 1, paragraphs 168 to 172 Mrs Caroline Spelman 5 week from that time until 2002, whenever Mrs Spelman was absent in London on parliamentary business.8 9. In her capacity as nanny, Mrs Haynes received free board and lodging, expenses and the use of a car, but no financial remuneration.9 In her capacity as Mrs Spelman’s administration assistant, Mrs Haynes was paid £13,000 a year for an 18-hour week, from Mrs Spelman’s parliamentary office costs allowance.10 The full-time equivalent salary would be about £27,100. 10. Following a discussion between Mrs Spelman and the Conservative Chief Whip, Mrs Haynes ceased to be paid from parliamentary allowances after about June 1999. She then became Mrs Spelman’s full-time nanny, with some additional domestic responsibilities to those she had already been carrying out and spending more time with Mrs Spelman’s children. From this point on, Mrs Haynes received from Mrs Spelman a salary of £13,000 per annum, in addition to the board, lodging and use of a car that were already provided.

Load more