Richard Willis's Blog

First for local news and first for comment

Yet Another Labour MP Caught Fiddling Expenses

Today former Labour MP for Luton South, Margaret Moran, was found by a jury to have committed the largest fraud of Parliamentary expenses to have come to court. The jury found that she had sought to claim £60,000 but had in fact been paid £53,000 based on fraudulent claims for her three properties. This was no case of bending the rules or trying the system, Moran was found to have claimed £2,000 for a phone line which did not exist, carpets for three bedrooms in a one bedroom flat, and to have resubmitted claims with different details when they were at first rejected by the Parliamentary Fees Office.

Moran is one of a long line of Labour MPs caught out fiddling their expenses. Earlier this month former Labour Minister Denis MacShane was forced to resign from Parliament for fiddling his expenses in what was described as the “gravest” case to come before the Parliamentary Standards body. Moran’s false expense claims amount to more than FOUR TIMES MacShane’s deceit. However, she will probably avoid jail due to her claim of severe depressive mental illness.

To date the following 6 MPs have been found to have ripped off the British tax-payers:

Margaret Moran (Labour) – Luton South – £53,000 – TBC

Elliot Morley (Labour) – Glanford and Scunthorpe – £30,000 – 16 months in prison

Derek Chaytor (Labour) – Bury North – £18,000 – 18 months in prison

Eric Illsley (Labour) – Barnsley Central – £14,500 – 12 months in prison

Denis MacShane (Labour) – Rotherham – £13,000 -TBC

Jim Devine (Labour) – Livingston – £9,000 – 16 months in prison

It is ironic that so many of the Labour MPs who were supporting Blair and Brown as they ruined our economy during their 13 years in office were lining their own pockets at our expense. The whole lot should be in prison in my opinion!


November 13, 2012 - Posted by | National


  1. Lord Taylor of Warwick, Lord Hanningfield? Then although they did not go to jail we have the Moat Man, the Duck Island ex MP, and various others forced to retire for irregularities in their Expenses. Then we have Lib-Dem David Laws who did at least fess up and repay the money and who was exiled to the backbenches from being No 2 at the Treasury.for a couple of years.

    Let he who is without sin cast the first stone!

    Comment by Steve Foley | November 13, 2012 | Reply

    • Yes the two peers were on the fiddle as well but the rules in the Lords are different from the Commons and I don’t know enough about the Lords expenses rules to comment. The fluff about moats and duck islands were mainly claims submitted and rejected as not eligible. When Commons expenses rules were quite vague sometimes MPs were encouraged to submit a claim so that it could be examined and the precedent set either way. That is not the same at all as fraudulently claiming money which you knew you were not entitled to, or forging documents and invoices!!

      No party gets off without some criticism but ONLY Labour members of the Commons have committed offences serious enough to have been prosecuted and imprisoned.

      Comment by Richard Willis | November 13, 2012 | Reply

  2. Oh and what about Derek Conway the former Conservative MP for Sidcup who started it all off by irregularities in his Expenses Claims?

    Comment by Steve Foley | November 13, 2012 | Reply

  3. It might be worth giving a thought to the fact that the only reason that the claims for a duck house and a moat were rejected was because they were too ridiculous to be paid. Would the applicants have refused the money if they had been paid? The intent was certainly there!!
    Why no mention of Jaqui Smith? She clearly knew what she was up to and no doubt her protection team would have known where she spent her nights!

    Comment by Howard Thomas | November 13, 2012 | Reply

    • Howard – I have worked with the Parliamentary Fees Office and I used to seek their advice on possible claims for Rob Wilson MP, who was declared “an angel” in the expenses furore. I therefore know how they operated when I was there (2005-08). The difference is that the duck house and moat claims were seemingly submitted in good faith and were rejected, whereas the Labour claims in question seem to have been misleading and fraudulent. That is a huge difference and one which has been recognised by the Police and courts system.

      Comment by Richard Willis | November 13, 2012 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: