Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

yeomans
 
 
Sunday, 1st August 2010

West Sussex MP angry over 'anti-gay bias'

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
14 May 2009
ARUNDEL and South Downs MP Nick Herbert has accused a national newspaper of anti-gay discrimination, after it published details of expenses he claimed for a house shared with his civil partner.
The Daily Telegraph included Mr Herbert in revelations about expenses claimed by Tory shadow cabinet members, as part of its continuing series on claims made by MPs and government ministers which have triggered a huge national debate and apologies from party leaders.

The paper said Mr Herbert, whose constituency includes Storrington and Pulborough, had charged taxpayers more than £10,000 for stamp duty and fees when he and his partner, Jason Eades, bought their terraced house in Arundel less than a year after he was elected MP in 2005.

Together, they took out a mortgage for almost the entire £490,000 purchase price, and since then, on top of the stamp duty and fees, Mr Herbert had claimed more than £65,000 for mortgage interest payments, "despite his partner's name also being on the property's deeds".

Civil partner

Mr Herbert, who is also shadow environment secretary, told the Telegraph: "My partner and I purchased a house in Arundel after I was elected in 2005 and I have claimed for some of the cost in accordance with the rules which treat partners and civil partners in the same way as spouses."

But as the controversy surrounding MPs' expenses intensified, Mr Herbert issued a further statement to the Herald yesterday (Wednesday, May 13), saying he was "surprised and disappointed" the Telegraph had implied he had done something wrong.

The paper's sole objection had been to his partner co-owning the house, but it had not raised similar concerns over second homes co-owned by MPs' married spouses.

No flipping

He said: "After I was elected in 2005, I realised that I would need a place in the constituency as well as London, as the extraordinary hours of the job would make daily commuting unrealistic, so my partner Jason and I purchased a second home in Arundel.

"I have claimed towards some of the cost of this, but only for some of the stamp duty (a one-off payment) and monthly mortgage interest.

"We make the capital repayments ourselves.

"I do not claim for any household items, and we have not 'flipped' to re-designate our main home, as it's always been clear that we spend more nights a week in London than in West Sussex.

"We always assumed that we would pay capital gains tax on our house in Arundel, and we thought it was right to pay full council tax both in London and West Sussex – we do not claim any discount.

Discrimination

"I was therefore surprised and disappointed when the Daily Telegraph implied this week that I had done something wrong.

"Their sole objection was that my second home is co-owned by Jason, but they did not raise this concern in relation to other MPs whose second homes are co-owned by their husband or wife.

"I believe that it's right that the Commons rules are non-discriminatory by treating partners and civil partners in the same way as spouses.

"David Cameron took the same view, and that is why I do not appear in the list of shadow cabinet members who have been asked to repay claims."

Let down

Mr Herbert said he understood the public's anger about unjustifiable expense claims and was "very sorry indeed that my party has let everyone down so badly".

He strongly believed MPs should claim expenses only when absolutely necessary, and that the public had a right to know how the money was spent.


  • Mr Herbert claimed £141,036 in 2007-08 (the latest figure available)


  • In the full list of 645 MPs, his approved claim was listed in value as 402nd.



Have your say

Do you think there should be tougher rules on what expenses MPs can claim?

Vote yes or no in the panel to the right of the screen.

Worthing MPs Tim Loughton and Peter Bottomley call for reform. Read more by clicking here.

Read about Tim Loughton and his expenses by clicking here.

Read about Peter Bottomley and his expenses by clicking here.

Brian Stephens discusses MPs expenses in this week's Personal View.

-------------------------------------
Click here to go back to Worthing news.

Where are you? Add your pin to the Herald's international readers' map by clicking here.

Email the Herald: letters@worthingherald.co.uk

Click here for the Herald staff directory.

Want to read this page in French, German, Spanish, Polish, Portuguese, Urdu or 48 other languages? click here for Google translate.


Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 14 May 2009 10:46 AM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Worthing
 
Prev
1
Next
1

PeeJay,

Worthing 15/05/2009 07:28:32
This Man (if you can call him that) should be scacked and put in Court.
2

toomy,

Worthing 15/05/2009 13:38:20
PeeJay - I ask the question What for?

He has done nothing wrong so he cannot be jailed just because he earns more than you.

Is it because he is gay - once again - so what

My issue with Politicians is that Politics seems to be a career - straight from university to Houses Of Parliament - even Labour are doing it with rich kids of rich labour donors being "handed" safe seats

What do these people know about real life i.e life outside Parliament
3

I only speak the truth,

Worthing 15/05/2009 14:07:21
Nick Herbert has done nothing wrong, unlike other MPs who have claimed for what is not theres.

Let's not forget MPs earn £64K. They claim for the cost of running an office, and can claim for the running a home near the House of Commons and/or their constituency.

Arundel and South Downs should be impressed that more than 400 MPs claim more than their representative, who has no moat.
If his legal civil partner was a wife, would PeeJay be saying such things?

Surely we're all grown up enough now in the 21st century to realise that love and commitment is not confined to hetrosexual relationships.
4

toomy,

18/05/2009 14:21:37
The Herald should do a "Telegraph" using the freedom of information act about our Sussex Councillors - I'm not too sure the Herald would want to rock the boat however with what is I guess quite a large advertiser

I'm fed up learning about our Tory Councillors and what they get up to from the LibDems election leaflets!
5

toomy,

19/05/2009 11:31:10
Let me clarify the last post

Argus prints the spin doctors claim

Increase lower than last year

Lib Dems - increase still higher than other authorities

Council "Official" spin so thats what appears in the press - Childrens services are good and are getting better thanks to increased investment

Ofsted and LGO - services poor - same star rating as Haringey where baby P died

this sort of spin year after year is disgusting and these spin doctors (that WE pay for) should be sacked

Prev
1
Next

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 

Today's Vote

Do you think Caroline should be allowed to have the surgery paid for by the NHS?
Yes
No


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.