http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/03/29/home-secretary-jacqui-smith-submitted-expenses-claim-for-adult-films-watched-by-husband-115875-21237468/
By Mirror.co.uk 29/03/2009
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith was said to be "mortified" today after she was forced to offer a humiliating apology for an expenses claim which included adult films watched by her husband.
Ms Smith said she "mistakenly" submitted an expenses claim which included five pay-per-view films, including two adult movies which were viewed at her family home in her Redditch constituency.
A friend said the Home Secretary knew there was "no excuse" for the error but added: "To say she's angry with her husband is an understatement.
"Jacqui was not there when these films were watched.
"She's furious and mortified."
Ms Smith said in a statement: "I am sorry that in claiming for my internet connection, I mistakenly claimed for a television package alongside it.
"As soon as the matter was brought to my attention, I took immediate steps to contact the relevant parliamentary authorities and rectify the situation.
"All money claimed for the television package will be paid back in full."
But the Home Secretary was said to be "getting on with her job" today despite her embarrassment.
Ms Smith's husband, Richard Timney, apologised today for causing her embarrassment, saying: "I am really sorry for any embarrassment I have caused Jacqui.
"I can fully understand why people might be angry and offended by this.
"Quite obviously a claim should never have been made for these films, and as you know that money is being paid back."
The £67 Virgin Media bill was submitted last June as part of Ms Smith's expenses.
It included two 18-rated features, each costing £5, which were viewed on April 1 and April 6 last year.
The bill also included two viewings of the film Ocean's 13 - at £3.75 each - and an additional £3.50 to watch the film Surf's Up.
News of the claim is an embarrassment to Ms Smith who last month faced criticism for claiming taxpayer-funded allowances for her family home while living with her sister in London.
Ms Smith said she had "fully abided" by the rules by designating her sister's house as her "main" residence, allowing her to claim payments on the Redditch constituency home she shares with her husband and children.
The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, John Lyon, accepted a complaint about Ms Smith's claims and has called on her to explain the £116,000 which she has claimed since becoming an MP.
Advertisement - article continues below »
Click Here!
Today's apology came as Labour left-winger Harry Cohen, who was said to have claimed more than £300,000 in second home allowances on his house in the capital, insisted that he had done nothing wrong as it was "part of my salary".
Mr Cohen said that MPs had been told "Go out boys and spend it" when the present system was introduced under Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s.
A Sunday newspaper reported that the MP listed a single-bedroom schoolhouse in Colchester, Essex, and a caravan on nearby Mersea Island as his main home.
The paper said that it meant that over the past five years he was able to claim the maximum allowance of £104,701 on his constituency home 70 miles away in Leyton and Wanstead, east London.
It calculated that since 1990, he had received a total of £310,714 in allowances.
Mr Cohen was reported as saying that the arrangement had been cleared with the House of Commons authorities.
He said that the former Conservative minister John Moore had told MPs "Go out boys and spend it" when he introduced a big uprating of the allowance in the 1980s to head off a pay revolt by backbench Tories.
Mr Cohen said that he had taken full advantage of the arrangement ever since.
"That is exactly what John Moore said on behalf of Mrs Thatcher to her Tory MPs. That makes it part of my salary," he said.
"It really is part of my salary in all but name. That is what it exists for."
Mr Cohen said the Colchester property was his "family home".
He said that there was no reason under the Commons rules why London MPs should not live outside the capital and have a second home in their constituency.
"It is the legitimate costs of having a constituency home to do my job. We don't have a system where people are required to live in their constituency," he said.
"I am doing nothing wrong whatsoever. I am using it for parliamentary purposes. It is a legitimate and proper use of it."
Nevertheless the latest disclosure is likely to fuel demands for a complete overhaul of the system of MPs' expenses and allowances.
Gordon Brown last week tried to head off the growing public anger by asking the Committee on Standards in Public Life to carry out a review of the whole system.
It followed the disclosure that another Greater London MP, Immigration Minister Tony McNulty, was claiming the allowance on the home where his parents live in his Harrow constituency, even though he lived only a few miles away in Hammersmith.
However with the committee not planning to report until after the next general election, the latest row may lead to fresh demands for an immediate crackdown.
How and Why are Business Travellers Cheating Their Expense Reports? It is a question that has been asked, addressed and in some circumstances ignored for years. To successfully answer this we need to address the financial, emotional and psychological implications that employee expense has upon the organisation and the individual.
