House of Commons Committee on Standards and Privileges Mr Andrew Mackay and Ms Julie Kirkbride Fifth Report of Session 2010–11 Report and Appendices, together with formal minutes Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 19 October2010 HC 540 Published on 21 October 2010 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 Kevin Barron MP (Labour, Rother Valley) (Chair) Sir Paul Beresford MP (Conservative, Mole Valley) Annette Brooke MP (Liberal Democrat, Mid Dorset and North Poole) Rt hon Tom Clarke MP (Labour, Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill) Mr Geoffrey Cox MP (Conservative, Torridge and West Devon) Mr Jim Cunningham MP (Labour, Coventry South) Mr Oliver Heald MP (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire) Eric Ollerenshaw MP (Conservative, Lancaster and Fleetwood) Heather Wheeler MP (Conservative, South Derbyshire) 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), Miss Rhiannon Hollis (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. Mr Andrew Mackay and Ms Julie Kirkbride 1 Contents Report Page Introduction 3 The Commissioner’s inquiry 3 The Commissioner’s findings: Mr Andrew Mackay 4 The Commissioner’s findings: Ms Julie Kirkbride 7 Conclusion: Ms Julie Kirkbride 9 Mr Mackay’s evidence 9 Conclusions and recommendation: Mr Andrew Mackay 10 Appendix 1: Memorandum from the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards 12 Complaints against the Rt hon Andrew Mackay and Ms Julie Kirkbride 15 Oral and Written evidence received by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards 73 Appendix 2: Email to the Committee from Mr Andrew Mackay, 15 October, 2010139 Formal minutes 140 Mr Andrew Mackay and Ms Julie Kirkbride 3 Mr Andrew Mackay and Ms Julie Kirkbride Introduction 1. Mr Andrew Mackay was the Member of Parliament for Berkshire East and then Bracknell from 1983 to 2010. His wife, Ms Julie Kirkbride, was the Member for Bromsgrove from 1997 to 2010. They had homes in Bromsgrove and in London. For Parliamentary allowance purposes, the Bromsgrove property was Mr Mackay’s declared main home and Ms Kirkbride’s second home; the London property was Ms Kirkbride’s declared main home and Mr Mackay’s second home. 2. In October 2009, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards received a complaint from Mr Michael Goggins, a constituent of Ms Kirkbride, about the Additional Costs Allowance (ACA) claims made by both Ms Kirkbride and Mr Mackay. The complaint against Mr Mackay was that he had wrongly identified the Bromsgrove property as his main home for the purposes of making ACA claims. The complaint against Ms Kirkbride was that she had wrongly claimed against ACA for the cost of building an extension to the same property. 3. The Commissioner has produced a single memorandum reporting on his investigation into the complaints against both Mr Mackay and Ms Kirkbride. This is published at Appendix 1 to our Report. Mr Mackay submitted written evidence, which may be found at Appendix 2. The Commissioner’s inquiry 4. The Commissioner identifies two issues for him to resolve, as follows: whether Mr Mackay was acting within the rules of the House in identifying as his main home the Bromsgrove property he shared with his wife and fellow Member of Parliament, Ms Julie Kirkbride, when he knew that she had identified that home as her second home and would claim parliamentary allowances on it.1 and, whether Ms Kirkbride was within the rules of the House in claiming interest on the increased mortgage she took out in order to build an additional bedroom in her home in Bromsgrove when it was used by her brother principally to assist her with childcare and when no allowance was made by her for the cost of his use of the property.2 5. The Commissioner explains that, while he has considered the complaints against Mr Mackay and that against Ms Kirkbride separately and on their own merits, the two are linked, since, if Mr Mackay were within the rules in identifying the property in Bromsgrove 1 Appendix 1, paragraph 224 2 Appendix 1, paragraph 225 4 Mr Andrew Mackay and Ms Julie Kirkbride as his main home, then he would need to consider whether Ms Kirkbride was within the rules in claiming for the interest on an additional mortgage to fund the cost of building works at what was, in fact, her husband’s main home.3 6. Both Mr Mackay and Ms Kirkbride argued that the Commissioner should not pursue the complaint, since to do so would put them in triple jeopardy, following the audit of Members’ allowance claims by Sir Thomas Legg and the subsequent appeals process carried out by Sir Paul Kennedy.4 7. Mr Mackay was judged by Sir Thomas Legg’s audit of Members’ ACA claims to have over-claimed in the period 2004–05 to 2008–09.5 Sir Thomas made the same finding in respect of Ms Kirkbride. Sir Thomas concluded that Mr Mackay and Ms Kirkbride jointly obtained a financial benefit by the designation of their main and second homes. He suggested that, had they made different designations, they might each have reasonably claimed up to two-thirds of the full allowance on a shared home. He therefore recommended that each repay one third of the sums they had claimed, £29,243. 8. In dismissing Mr Mackay’s and Ms Kirkbride’s appeals against the finding of Sir Thomas Legg, Sir Paul Kennedy wrote that Sir Thomas’s suggestion that Mr Mackay and Ms Kirkbride could reasonably have claimed up to two thirds of the full allowance was, if anything, generous. Sir Paul did not, however, have any power to increase the recommended repayment and Mr Mackay and Ms Kirkbride each repaid £29,243. 9. The Commissioner considers that, given the seriousness of the allegations, it was right that he should inquire into, and that the House of Commons should have an opportunity to decide on, whether two of its former Members (although they were Members at the time) breached the rules of the House and, if so, whether they should face Parliamentary sanction for their conduct.6 We agree with the Commissioner’s decision. The Commissioner’s findings: Mr Andrew Mackay 10. The Commissioner’s memorandum shows that Mr Mackay claimed against his ACA for the full mortgage interest and other costs of his London home from 1997 onwards. In the five years from 2004–05 to 2008–09, he claimed and was paid for his mortgage interest a total of £49,230.7 His total claims against ACA during this period came to more than £100,000.8 Information for earlier years is no longer available.9 11. Mr Mackay’s evidence to the Commissioner was that in or around September 1997, shortly after he had married Ms Kirkbride, he held a discussion with the then Head of the Fees Office, who told Mr Mackay that he and his wife could each choose which property to 3 Appendix 1, paragraph 226 4 Appendix 1, paragraph 227 5 First Report from the Members Estimate Committee, Session 2009–10, Review of past ACA payments 6 Appendix 1, paragraph 228 7 Appendix 1, paragraph 140 8 Appendix 1, WE13 9 Appendix 1, paragraph 141 Mr Andrew Mackay and Ms Julie Kirkbride 5 nominate as their main home and which as their second home. Mr Mackay told the Commissioner that the former Head recommended that Mr Mackay should designate the Bromsgrove property as his main home and claim ACA on the London property and that Ms Kirkbride should designate their London property as her main home. The former Head of the Fees Office told the Commissioner that, while he did not recall what advice he gave, he did not accept that he would have given the advice which Mr Mackay has suggested he gave.10 12.