|
The United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal was a major political scandal, first hinted at as details of the Conway Scandal leaked into the public domain, prior to further leaked evidence of malpractice, 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. 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'. 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". 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". In May 2008, the High Court (England and Wales) ruled in favour of releasing the details of MPs' expenses claims.〔''Corporate Officer of the House of Commons v Information Commissioner'' () (EWHC 1084 (Admin) )〕 In April 2009 the House of Commons authorities announced that publication of expenses, with certain information deemed "sensitive" removed, would be made in July 2009. 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, and widespread assertions that the most serious abuses would not have come to light had the censored documentation been the only information available.〔 Details of voluntary repayments by MPs amounting to almost £500,000 were also officially published.〔 〕 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. On 11 March all four announced they would plead not guilty to charges of false accounting, however they were all later jailed. 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 jailed. 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. ==Background and legal proceedings== In January 2005, the Freedom of Information Act 2000 came into force, allowing members of the public to request disclosure of information from public bodies. One early request came from the journalist Jon Ungoed-Thomas. Another request came from journalist and freedom of information campaigner Heather Brooke. Both asked for details of the expenses claimed by certain MPs to be released. The requests were subsequently passed over to the Information Commissioner, who joined the journalists' cases together and ordered the release of some information on 15 June 2007. House of Commons authorities objected to this order in June 2007 and MPs had, in May 2007, voted in favour of the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill which sought to exempt MPs from the 2000 act. The House of Commons voted 96 to 25 in favour of the Exemption of the House of Commons amendment but the bill was ultimately withdrawn prior to second reading in the House of Lords because peers were unwilling to sponsor the bill. In February 2008, after referral to an Information Tribunal, it was held that Commons authorities would release information on 14 MPs. This decision was subsequently appealed against, delaying the release of information. In the tax year 2007–2008, MPs' costs of staying away from their main homes was limited to £23,083.〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Members' allowance expenditure 2007–08: explanatory notes ) 〕 In January 2009, Harriet Harman, Leader of the House of Commons, tabled a motion which would exempt MPs' expenses from being disclosed under a Freedom of Information request, in order to prevent any further disclosure of information. Labour MPs were placed under a three line whip in order to force the motion through the Commons. However, opposition parties stated they would vote against the proposals, and large-scale public opposition emerged. The proposals were ultimately dropped on 21 January 2009. The Commons authorities announced that full disclosure of all MPs’ expenses would be published on 1 July 2009.〔 Ultimately the media disclosure made the legal appeal moot; the appeal was finally heard at the High Court, which ruled on 16 May 2008 in favour of releasing the information.〔 No appeal was lodged against the High Court ruling, and the requested details were made public on 23 May 2008. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|