Seven-day suspension for Lib Dem MP who fiddled his expenses rather than admit he was gay

The Standards and Privileges Committee recommended a seven-day suspension from the House of Commons after finding that the Liberal Democrat MP had committed “a series of serious breaches of rules”. He will also have to apologise.

Mr Laws resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury little more than a fortnight into the coalition, when it emerged that he had claimed allowances to pay his partner James Lundie rent.

The Yeovil MP argued that his motive was to avoid outing himself as gay, rather than profit.

The cross-party committee said Mr Laws had already repaid £56,592 - the full amount of his second home allowance claims between July 2006 and July 2009.

He also referred his own conduct to Standards Commissioner John Lyon when the issues emerged publicly last May.

But the watchdog concluded: “Nonetheless, whatever his motives and subsequent behaviour, Mr Laws was guilty of a series of serious breaches of the rules, over a considerable time.

“We recommend that Mr Laws should be suspended from the service of the House for a period of seven sitting days.”

The suspension should begin on June 7, according to the MPs.

In a statement, Mr Laws said: “I accept the conclusions of the inquiry and take full responsibility for the mistakes which I have made.

“I apologise to my constituents and to Parliament. Each of us should be our own sternest critic, and I recognise that my attempts to keep my personal life private were in conflict with my duty as an MP to ensure that my claims were in every sense above reproach.

“I should have resolved this dilemma in the public interest and not in the interests of my privacy.

“However, from the moment these matters became public, I have made clear that my motivation was to protect my privacy, rather than to benefit from the system of parliamentary expenses, and I am pleased that the Commissioner has upheld that view.

“I have also, from the very beginning, made clear that I believed that my secrecy about my private life led me to make lower overall claims than would otherwise be the case, and this has been confirmed by the Parliamentary Commissioner and by the committee.

“The taxpayer gained, rather than lost out, from my desire for secrecy, though I fully accept that this is not an adequate reason for breaking the rules.

“This last year has been a difficult one, and I am grateful to family, friends, constituents and colleagues for their support and understanding.”

Mr Laws lived with Mr Lundie in a London flat owned by the lobbyist from 2000-2007.

Mr Lundie sold the flat in July 2007, and bought another property in the capital - financing the purchase partly with a £99,000 gift from Mr Laws.

Standards Commissioner John Lyon found that “any reasonable person properly seized of the facts” would agree Mr Laws had been in breach of rules against using expenses to rent from a partner, which were introduced in July 2006.

However, he went further and concluded that from April 2005 the MP was wrong to designate his Somerset home as his main home, because he was spending more time living with Mr Lundie in London.

The arrangement meant Mr Laws was able to claim thousands of pounds in allowances against the property in the capital, including rent and utilities.

Mr Lyon also said the MP had misled the Commons authorities since he was elected to parliament in 2001 by filing lodging agreements that gave a “false impression” of his relationship with Mr Lundie.

“I conclude, therefore that Mr Laws’ conduct was not above reproach because he submitted to the fees office from 2001 lodging agreements which gave a false impression of his relationship with his landlord and their shared use of the landlord’s successive London properties,” Mr Lyon’s report said.

“I come to this conclusion on the basis of the standard expected of Members at the time, and not any subsequent raising of the bar.

“Even in 2001, it would not, in my judgment, have been acceptable to seek to make claims supported by misleading documentation.

“The result was that the fees office had no opportunity to challenge or advise Mr Laws about the particular nature of his claims in the light of his circumstances.

“Mr Laws’ wish to maintain his personal privacy cannot, in my view, justify - although it may explain - such conduct.”

The committee agreed with the findings, saying: “We consider the rental agreements submitted between 2003 and 2008 were misleading and designed to conceal the nature of the relationship.

“They prevented any examination of the arrangements that in fact pertained over the entire period.”

The MPs accepted that former banker Mr Laws could have made higher claims had he been open about his living arrangements, and used expenses to run his substantial Somerset home.

But they added: “While it is clear that Mr Laws could have arranged his affairs in a way which was less good value for money, we do not agree that the criterion of value for money should be established by comparing his potential claims with his actual claims.”

Mr Laws was found to have paid his partner up to £370 per month above the market rent for similar lodgings.

He also used expenses to contribute £2,000 to building works at the second London property they shared during the period.

The commissioner said his year-long inquiry had turned up “no evidence” that Mr Laws intended to benefit financially by concealing arrangements, but the sums of money involved were “substantial”.

“I believe there was a conflict between (Mr Laws’) private interest in secrecy and the public interest in him being open and honest in relation to his expenses claims,” Mr Lyon said.

“I recognise and have very great sympathy with Mr Laws for the difficulty of the decision he had to make in resolving that conflict, because it affected all aspects of his life as he had presented it over many years.

“But it was, in my view, a decision which he had to make under the code of conduct and one which he should have straight away resolved in the public interest, either by being open with the House authorities about the relationship with his landlord, or by making no claims at all against his accommodation allowance and accepting the ever-present risk that the relationship would anyway come to public attention as, eventually, it did.”

The report revealed that Mr Laws admitted regularly putting in expenses claims just below the £250 threshold that would have meant receipts were required.

The MP told the commissioner: “I didn’t want to send in bills with his name on. It was an aspect of my secrecy.”

Mr Laws also said he had not changed his main home designation to London in 2004-5 “because I believed that to do so would be likely to raise questions about my relationship with my landlord”.

There was no immediate comment from Prime Minister David Cameron or his Lib Dem deputy Nick Clegg - who have both previously expressed a hope that Mr Laws could return to the political frontline.

Page 7: 12:30Business Secretary Vince Cable offered words of support to his Lib Dem colleague.

“He’s a very able colleague,” he told Sky News. “I’ve worked with him over many years and he’s a very able, talented person.”

He looked forward to seeing him “back in action” as soon as possible, he added.

“I’m sure we will see him back,” he said.

Former Lib Dem leader Lord Ashdown said Mr Laws had undoubtedly broken Commons rules.

But he questioned whether the suspension was in line with punishments meted out to other politicians over expenses abuses.

“Is it right for somebody like (Labour former home secretary) Jacqui Smith, who broke the rules and financially gained, to be treated with an oral apology, and someone like him - who broke the rules and saved the public (£30,000) - to be given a sanction like this?” Lord Ashdown told ITV News.

Labour frontbencher Chris Bryant branded the Lib Dem response to Mr Laws’ punishment “sanctimonious”.

Posting on social networking site Twitter, Mr Bryant said: “There seems to be one Laws for a Lib Dem and another for the rest. I really don’t buy this argument, but it’s the sanctimony that I can’t stand.”

He added: “Didn’t the Lib Dems want MPs who broke the rules to be subject to right of recall? Does this apply now?”

Education Secretary Michael Gove told the Commons during an announcement on vocational education reforms that he hoped Mr Laws would return to Government.

He said Mr Laws, Access to Education Advocate Lib Dem Simon Hughes and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg had played a part in the coalition education reforms.

Mr Gove added: “It is my personal hope that we will all be able once more to make use of his (Mr Laws’) talents in the country’s service before too long.”

Speaking at a joint question and answer session in Stratford, neither Mr Cameron nor Mr Clegg would be drawn on whether Mr Laws could make a return to government.

The Prime Minister said it was important to study the standards report and apology.

“I have made clear just from knowing him as I do and dealing with him, I do think he has a lot to offer public life.

“I hope he stays in public life.”

Mr Clegg said the committee and the commissioner had accepted that Mr Laws had not gained personally from the financial arrangement.

“David Laws is a good friend and a close colleague. We do need to look at the report but his motives, he has always been very open about his motives,” he said.

“They were about protecting his own privacy, not financial gain. I think that is very important when we pass judgment on people, is to look at the ‘why’ - not just the ‘what’, but also the ‘why’.”