Downing Street Says » MPs’ Expenses

The Prime Minister s Spokesman began by saying that there had been accusations made against Shahid Malik in the past twenty-four hours, in particular that he received preferential rent on his main residence. This allegation represented a potential financial benefit, and as it was not declared as part of Mr Malik s Ministerial declaration this could represent a breach of the Ministerial Code. The Prime Minister would be acting in line with the Ministerial Code paragraph 1.3, which stated that if there was an allegation about a breach of the Code and the Prime Minister having consulted the Cabinet Secretary felt that it warranted further investigation, he would refer the matter to the Independent Advisor on Ministers Interests. In light of these accusations against Shahid Malik and the need for them to be properly investigated, the Prime Minister had asked the Independent Advisor on Ministers Interests, Sir Philip Mawer, to establish as a matter of urgency the facts on the matter and advise accordingly. In the meantime and pending the outcome of Sir Philip Mawer s investigation, Shahid Malik would be stepping down as a Minister.

Asked if there would be a replacement for Shahid Malik, the PMS said that Mr Malik was not being replaced at this point.

Asked how soon Sir Philip Mawer s investigation would conclude and asked if the Prime Minster had spoken to Shahid Malik, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had spoken to Shahid Malik, the Cabinet Secretary and Jack Straw. Sir Philip Mawe had been asked to conclude his investigation as a matter of urgency. At this point the claims about Shahid Malik were accusations, and it was important that Sir Philip Mawer established the facts; Shaid Malik was stepping down pending the outcome of Sir Philip Mawer establishing the facts.

Asked about the particular claim the PMS was talking about, the PMS said that the accusation was that Shahid Malik had received preferential rent on his main residence and if the claim was true it would represent a financial interest that should have been declared and made part of the published Ministerial interests.

Asked if Shahid Malik would get his job back if he was found not guilty, the PMS said that that would be the expectation.

Asked who took the decision in regards to Shahid Malik stepping down, the PMS said that the Prime Minister, having consulted the Cabinet Secretary felt that the accusation was serious enough to warrant an investigation by Sir Philip Mawer. There was then a discussion with Shahid Malik, and the decision was taken that the right thing for Mr Malik to do was to stand down while this investigation was ongoing.

Asked if the Prime Minister had asked the Cabinet Secretary to look into any other cases that had been publicised recently, the PMS said that we were not aware of any specific accusations that had been made in relation to other Ministers and the Ministerial Code.

Asked when Shahid Malik had decided to step down, the PMS said that he didn t want to get into the exact chronology of what happened. The Prime Minister was informed first thing this morning that in light of the accusations made in the Daily Telegraph there was a potential breach of the Ministerial Code. The decision was taken to call in Sir Philip Mawer to find out if the allegations were true and to discuss the situation with Mr Malik.

Asked if Shahid Malik would continue to be paid his Ministerial wage, the PMS said no.

Asked if the Prime Minister was aware of the unrepentant tone of Shaihd Malik in his interviews this morning, the PMS said that he was not there to speak on behalf of Shahid Malik, but it was important to note that nearly all the questions put to him this morning were about his Parliamentary allowances. The issue we were discussing today was a separate matter about whether or not the alleged receipt of subsidised rent should have been declared.

Asked if the Prime Minister had a view about Parliamentary allowances, the PMS said that the Prime Minister had lots of views about Parliamentary allowances that he had been making clear recently and would continue to make clear in the days and weeks ahead.

Asked if giving the claimed money to charity was a legitimate way of showing remorse, the PMS said that that was a question for Shahid Malik; the key thing was that MPs could make their own decisions, but in addition there should be an independent process, which covered all parties and took those sorts of decisions. If individual MPs wanted to make their own decisions then it was their choice, but that didn t exempt them from the independent process that every MP would have to adhere to.

Asked who made the Prime Minister aware of the situation this morning, the PMS said that the situation became apparent late last night once we saw the allegations. It was not normal procedure to give information on private discussions, but staff in both the Cabinet Office and Downing Street were aware that this was an issue.

Asked when Sir Philip Mawer s investigation would start, the PMS said that there had been a number of constructive meetings and the next meeting would take place on Tuesday.

Asked hypothetically how such information should be declared, the PMS said that it would have to be declared to the Permanent Secretary and would then be included in a publication of Ministers interests, which the Prime Minister introduced when he first took office.

Put that Shahid Malik had not declared his situation to the Permanent Secretary, the PMS said that that was correct.

Asked if the Prime Minister had sympathy for MPs who said that they got prior approval from the Fees Office, the PMS said that that was one of the reasons why he wanted decisions made by the Fees Office to be looked over.

Asked if the Prime Minister had any plans to speak to the Speaker of the House of Commons in the next few days, the PMS said that the Prime Minister spoke to the Speaker from time to time but such conversations were kept private.

Asked if there had been any interim rules on couples claiming Second Home Allowance, the PMS said that it was an issue that needed to be looked at as part of Sir Christopher Kelly s review.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Friday, May 15, 2009

MPs’ Expenses

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries