Four Charged In Expenses Scandal!

In a further blow to the reputation of Parliament it was announced today that three MPs and one member of the House of Lords will face criminal charges over their expenses claims.

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Keith Starmer, confirmed that Labour MPs Elliot Morley, Jim Devine and David Chaytor will face charges under the Theft Act along with Conservative peer Lord Hanningfield. Lord Clarke, a Labour peer, has been told that he will not face any charges but a case against a sixth politician is still under investigation.

Mr Starmer stood outside the Crown Prosecution Service headquarters in London to announce to the large media presence assembled there: "In four cases, we have concluded that there is sufficient evidence to bring criminal charges and that it’s in the public interest to charge the individuals concerned."

It has been a tumultuous period at Westminster since The Daily Telegraph published leaked results of expenses claims made by MPs. There was public fury at claims made for items such as duck houses, luxury kitchen accessories, kit kats and paper clips. An audit of the claims, under the auspices of Sir Thomas Legg, was released yesterday and has resulted in 390 MPs having to pay back over £1.1m. The pending police enquiry, however, had been looming over Parliament like a black cloud and the announcement made by the DPP today will come as a hammer blow to the reputation of MPs of all parties.

The three MPs who are being charged quickly released a joint statement in which they said that they refuted all of the charges and that they would defend their position robustly. These charges have not been brought lightly. They are without precedent in modern political history and are the result of a detailed enquiry by senior lawyers within the CPS and "an external and highly experienced criminal QC."

The charged MPs say that they are "extremely disappointed that the charges have been brought". It is thought that they believe, after consulting with lawyers, that their actions should be covered by the protocol of Parliamentary privilege which guarantees immunity from slander laws. The CPS however remain firm in their belief that the criminal acts with which the MPs are charged are not protected by Parliamentary privilege and are looking forward to testing this in court.

With the legal arguments likely to rumble on for a long time before any court appearances are made then it seems that the expenses scandal is going to run and run.