Copies of invoices for hotel claims by Lee Anderson MP

The rules governing what MPs may claim for are set out in The Scheme of MPs’ Staffing and Business Costs (the “Scheme”).

Chapter 4 of the Scheme details the costs which may be claimed under Accommodation Expenditure.

Rules for claiming costs associated with hotel accommodation are set out in Chapter 9.

You may also find our recent blog, Why do MPs need an accommodation budget? useful for further information on what MPs can claim.

Question 1

I can confirm that we hold information relevant to your request.

Copies of the receipts and supporting evidence for claims for Lee Anderson in 2020-2021, 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 have been provided as an attachment to the email accompanying this letter. Some information has been redacted and is subject to a refusal notice under sections 31, 38, 40 and 44 of the FOIA, and in accordance with Section C of IPSA’s Publication Policy

Section 31(1)(a) – law enforcement

This exemption applies where the disclosure of information would or would be likely to prejudice the prevention of crime. IPSA relies on this exemption to withhold the banking details of suppliers and other transactional references. IPSA believes that the disclosure of these details could leave those concerned more vulnerable to financial crime, in particular fraud and electronic crime, especially with the increase in cyber-attacks.

This exemption is subject to a public interest test. IPSA does not consider that the withholding of this information has a negative impact on the understanding of these claims. We, therefore, find that the public interest in withholding this information outweighs the public interest in disclosure at this time.

Section 38(1)(b) - health and safety

This exemption applies where disclosure of the information would – or would be likely to – endanger the safety of any individual. IPSA relies on this exemption to withhold any information which could reveal names of hotels that MPs and their staff use. IPSA maintains that the disclosure of this information carries a high risk of endangering the MP and their staff.

MPs and their staff have difficult jobs, and IPSA is aware that the decision to disclose certain categories of information could make it more difficult for them to fulfil these. This would have a knock-on effect on those whom MPs and their staff try to help. IPSA, therefore, maintains that the public interest in withholding this information outweighs the public interest in disclosure at this time.

Sections 40(2) and 40(3A)(a) – personal information

This exemption applies to information within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the UK General Data Protection Regulation 2016 (UK GDPR). IPSA considered that the following are personal data within this definition: the names of MPs’ staff members.

#We then considered whether disclosure of this personal data would breach any of the Principles relating to the processing of personal data in the UK GDPR.

As IPSA was unable to find a lawful basis on which it could rely, within Article 6 of the UK GDPR, it therefore finds that the information is exempt under section 40.

Section 44(1)(a) – claims that are still being processed

Section 44(1)(a) of the FOI Act provides that information is exempt if its disclosure is prohibited by or under any enactment. In this case, Parliamentary Standards Act (2009) sets out the conditions for the disclosure of claims.

In line with the regulatory functions granted within the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009 and the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, the premature disclosure of receipts for claims that have not completed the validation process is exempt from disclosure.

Section 44 is an 'absolute' exemption, so it is not necessary to balance the public interests for and against disclosing the information.