The four MPs who get paid for a home that is neither in their constituency nor near Parliament

Members of Parliament have two places of work – their constituency and the House of Commons. Where those two places are far apart it’s reasonable for them to receive financial support so that they can spend their time split between living in two places rather than being able to live in just the one. That’s not to say the current rules on this are perfect by any means, but the principle – ‘if work forces you to be in two places, it helps pay for it’ – is a reasonable one, and indeed one that is widely followed in non-political jobs too.

However, it’s a very different matter if an MP is receiving money for a second home when one of their homes is neither located conveniently for their constituency nor for Parliament.

Duncan Borrowman’s blog takes [or rather, took, as his blog is no longer public] up the story:

The Sunday Telegraph has uncovered four cases where MPs are receiving up to £24,000-a-year in “second home allowance” despite one of their two homes being nowhere near either Westminster or their constituency.

The picture built is one of a “belt of shame” across South East London Tories.

Surprise, surprise, Bob Neill is one of the MPs who feature.

Ed Davey MP’s take on the matter, as reported by the Daily Telegraph, is:

To use the ACA [Additional Costs Allowance] in this way is incredible. It may be within the law, but it’s like people doing dodgy tax deals which are just about legal but go against the spirit of the tax legislation. MPs should not just play within the letter of the law but also within the spirit of the law. The people opposing reform of this system are bringing democracy and Parliament into disrepute.