Landmark Freedom Of Information Act Ruling On MPs' Expenses

Freedom of Information campaigner Heather Brooke and two Sunday newspaper journalists are celebrating winning a three-year battle to allow full access to MPs' expenses claims under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Heather Brooke was represented by SM&B. The Information Tribunal, which adjudicates on FoI disputes, today ruled that the current system of regulating MPs' Additional Costs Allowance (ACA) was “a recipe for confusion, inconsistency and the risk of misuse”.

Brooke, a journalist and author of citizens' guide Your Right to Know, who has campaigned since 2006, said: "What's disappointing is that it took three years of concerted effort to counter the relentless opposition from the House of Commons Commission and Speaker Michael Martin, who used taxpayer money throughout to block the very information needed for an informed electorate. By their secrecy, these officials have severely damaged public trust in parliament."

The panel of three judges ruled that the “deeply unsatisfactory” system had a “shortfall both in transparency and in accountability”. The tribunal found unanimously in favour of disclosure, but with safeguards to ensure that details of MPs' credit cards, bank statements, itemised telephone bills, names and addresses of contractors with access to MPs' homes, and details of security spending are not published.

Previously Parliament had disclosed a total figure for the ACA - but journalists will now be able to request a detailed, itemised list of MPs’ expense claims, including hotel and tax receipts and the costs of keeping their second home – bringing Westminster in line with the Scottish Parliament.

The new disclosure will be the most detailed release of information about MPs' expenditure since the Freedom of Information Act came into force in 2005. It should be released within 28 days, according to the ruling by an information appeal tribunal.