The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

David Laws found guilty of breaching “around six” parliamentary expenses rules

The Lib Dem MP’s return to cabinet will not be as swift as predicted – but it’s not off the cards.

By Samira Shackle Published 10 May 2011 17:37

A swift return to cabinet for David Laws is looking increasingly unviable despite the wishes of Nick Clegg and David Cameron.

The Liberal Democrat MP has been found guilty of breaching "around six" expenses rules. These are understood to include breaking regulations on claims for a second home and renting property from a partner, among others.

It's not all bad news for Laws: John Lyon, the parliamentary commissioner for standards, has concluded that there is no evidence to suggest he broke the rules out of a desire to maximise profits. Rather, Laws – who claimed more than £40,000 in expenses for rent paid to his partner Jamie Lundie – was motivated by the wish to keep his sexuality private.

But however understandable his intentions were, the fact remains that this is a grave breach of the rules. It is good that the Commons standards and privileges committee has not shied away from this.

It is, however, a setback for Laws's prospects of a speedy return to cabinet, which as recently as a few weeks ago looked like a dead cert. Since he quit as chief secretary to the Treasury when news about his expenses emerged last year, after just 17 days in government, both Cameron and Clegg have been keen for him to return to government.

Cameron expressed impatience a few months ago at the length of time that the inquiry was taking because he wanted Laws back in government. Clegg's enthusiasm springs from Laws being one of the most influential and well-known Lib Dems, and a close ally of his on the right of the party.

While the wheels have been set in motion for Laws to return to cabinet, this was always dependent on the outcome of the inquiry. Both Cameron and Clegg are aware that it would not be good for public image to restore him now.

This is corroborated by Cameron's interview today with the Sun, in which he says that he does not plan any cabinet reshuffles this year. The article goes on to suggest that there may not be any changes until May 2012. Regardless of this, however, Laws will continue to play an important backstage role – both in deciding Lib Dem party strategy and in supporting the coalition. It is highly likely that a renewed cabinet role will follow eventually, as soon as the time is right.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: David Laws

More from Samira Shackle

9 comments

Wed, 2011-05-11 23:13 — Herbert (not verified)

You forget, Orange Booker, the interesting fact that when Laws was asked to provide evidence to support his utilities claims the amount he claimed fell significantly. There's only one interpretation for that.

'He regularly claimed £150 a month for utilities and £200 a month for service and maintenance. At the time, MPs could claim expenses under £250 without receipts.
In March 2008, this threshold was lowered to £25. From then on, Mr Laws claimed £37 a month for utility bills and under £25 for service, maintenance and repairs.'

Wed, 2011-05-11 13:03 — Orange Booker (not verified)

I would like to point out to the trolls above that Laws did not steal any money. What he did was claim money he was legally entitled to, but transfer the money to his partner, which was against the rules.

It is not the same thing. The "stealing" and the "not motivated by personal gain" don't exactly fit seamlessly together.

Tue, 2011-05-10 18:02 — Dave C (not verified)

So the Lib Dems are stuck with Danny Alexander as one of their 'big' four. My heart bleeds.

Tue, 2011-05-10 18:07 — Lou (not verified)

Convenient excuse that no one can argue with.

So this particular MP, who robbed the electorate of far more than the ones in jail, waits patiently for people to forget and then returns back to Govt instead of joining his former colleagues in one of HMPs who are shackled up with the benefit claimants who failed to declare their partner was living with them for fear of being outed over their sexuality.

40k alone was the rent claimed, that's not adding in the building work, the phone bills and all the other sundries we aren't privy to yet. Not one of those jailed committed such large financial deceptions.

A disgraceful cop out on the part of the standards committee and the law. It stinks, it's wrong and on the strength of it, if I were an MP in jail, I would go for an appeal. In the meantime, people should refer the matter to the Met themselves and let's see justice actually being seen to be done.

Tue, 2011-05-10 19:59 — martybee (not verified)

Every time his name is metioned, either spoken or written it should be prefixed by the words.." the expense fiddler and taxpayer cheat"

Tue, 2011-05-10 22:14 — mcquade

Hear hear, Lou!

Tue, 2011-05-10 22:25 — Graeme (not verified)

An appalling little creep, a cheat and liar, and has defrauded a huge amount of public money. He is unfit for any planned role, in fact he should he thrown out of parliament.

Wed, 2011-05-11 08:17 — fgggyu (not verified)

very cheep--http://fivefingersebuy.com
very cheep--http://fivefingersebuy.com
very cheep--http://fivefingersebuy.com
very cheep--http://fivefingersebuy.com

Wed, 2011-05-11 23:10 — martybee (not verified)

@ Orange booker...so its ok for someone on benefit to claim his rent.(quite legally) and then pay it to his partner with whom he is domiciled...dont think so somehow.