Baroness escapes charges
Comments |
Labour peer Baroness Uddin has escaped prosecution
following a police investigation into her parliamentary
allowances.
The Baroness gave the address of a
flat in Maidstone off Wat Tyler Way as her main home and then
claimed subsistance allowances thought to total in the region of
£100,000 for staying at her family home in East London.
But the Director of Public
Prosecutions Keir Starmer has decided it would not be possible to
bring a successful prosecution because there was no legal
definition in the House of Lords’ expenses scheme for what
constituted a main residence.
Mr Starmer said: "Members of the
House of Lords are entitled to claim certain expenses under the
House of Lords’ expenses scheme and one of those is for ‘night
subsistence’. That allowance can only be claimed if a peer whose
‘only or main residence’ is outside London stays ‘overnight’ in
London because of House of Lords business.
"The allegation against Baroness
Uddin was that she had claimed ‘night subsistence’ for overnight
stays in London, after attendances in the House of Lords, to which
she was not entitled.
"Although she had nominated a flat
she owned in Maidstone as her ‘only or main residence’, it was
alleged that ‘her only or main residence’ was in fact a house in
east London.
"It was always recognised that the
definition of ‘only or main residence’ under the House of Lords’
expenses scheme would be critical to any possible criminal
proceedings against Baroness Uddin. However, ‘only or main
residence’ is not defined in the House of Lords’ expenses scheme
itself; nor is it defined in legislation."
Mr Stramer pointed to a statement
by the Clerk of the Parliaments, Michael Pownall, in which it was
stated that it was up to "members to designate an address
as their main residence as they see fit".
Last month, Mr Pownall stated: "A
main residence has to be visited with a degree of frequency: in the
order of at least once a month, over the year, when the House is
sitting."
Mr Starmer said: "On that
interpretation, in any criminal proceedings, it would be necessary
for the prosecution to prove that any peer in question had not even
visited the address they deemed their ‘only or main’ residence once
a month.
"That presents a very real
difficulty and I have advised the Metropolitan Police to take no
further action."
Baroness Uddin could still be
disciplined by the Lords authorities if they find she breached
guidelines for allowances.
Friday, March 12 2010
The KM Group does not moderate comments.
Please click here for our house rules.