The Blog of
Nadine Dorries
IPSA's Provisional Findings
Posted Wednesday, 24 July 2013 at 16:16

I suppose the big question is why, out of 649 other MPs, IPSA chose to launch an expensive and time consuming investigation into my expenses, especially given that I have never claimed many of the expenses to which I was entitled.

I am sure it is just a coincidence that, as the pressure began to mount for my whip to be returned after three months of suspension, wham, I surprisingly had an investigation in process. Any request for reinstatement met with the response from the Chief Whip 'we now have to wait for the IPSA investigation to end'.

Funny that no longer seemed important the morning after UKIP did so well in the local elections and I suddenly got my whip back, whilst the IPSA investigation was still in process.

With regard to the report itself, I am delighted that the compliance officer made NO findings against me, which is obviously the biggie, and that throughout the report he stressed that I have at no time sought to benefit from the scheme and he even highlighted some of the expenses I could have claimed but didn't.

There was a technical breach that was IPSA's fault. Strange how it becomes technical when it's down to IPSA. They approved travel expenses which the compliance officer said should not have been approved, by IPSA.

They were wrongfully claimed on IPSAs explicit instructions to claim and then wrongfully paid by IPSA.

He didn't mention that, in error, they haven't paid me £6,000 worth of salary. Probably because he didn't think it was relevant to the investigation but IPSA would never have let him as it would have only highlighted further their total incompetence.

I have to say, the compliance officer is a straight guy but in my opinion he is nobbled by IPSA. Even though his appointment is statutory, which means he doesn't officially work for IPSA, his office is bang in the middle of the IPSA staff and I believe they have the upper hand.

This report was due out on Monday, however, I have lost count how many times IPSA have referred the report, which makes no findings against me, back to their incredibly expensive lawyers at Matrix Chambers. Or at least, I believe that's who they use.

Is there a connection between the people at Matrix and Board members at IPSA? Did IPSA use a tendering process before they appointed their lawyers? Or is someone in Matrix a friend of someone in IPSA? I'm only asking because it is public money and the rumour is that IPSA have spent half a million pounds with Matrix.

Anyway, as everyone knows, I have removed myself from the personal expenses system. I shall use my salary to fund my second home in Westminster and my travel and all other personal expenses, which in effect means I shall be working for free.

When we had the expenses crisis in 2009, the problem was never who paid the expenses, it was expenses. Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg thought that the answer to the problem, was to change the people who paid the expenses from the fees office to IPSA.

Expenses need to be scrapped in their entirety.

 
 
 
 
Contact Nadine
Nadine Dorries MP
House of Commons
London SW1A 0AA
via e-mail at: nadine.dorries.mp@parliament.uk
or Telephone on 020 7219 5928

 
My Recent Posts
Posted Thursday, 19 October 2017 at 12:14
 
Posted Wednesday, 20 September 2017 at 10:44
 
Posted Sunday, 17 September 2017 at 10:09
 
Posted Thursday, 14 September 2017 at 13:27
 
Posted Thursday, 14 September 2017 at 08:30
 
Posted Monday, 12 June 2017 at 11:52
 
Posted Tuesday, 23 May 2017 at 09:34
 
Posted Thursday, 20 April 2017 at 10:49
 
Blog Roll
Conservative Home

Dizzy Thinks

Guido Fawkes

Cranmer

Iain Dale

Spectator Coffee House

Political Betting

Politics Home

John Redwood

Dan Hannan

Douglas Carswell

 

Blog Archive