Skip to the content

Invoice for stationery claimed by Fabian Hamilton MP
CAS-49597
Disclosure Date:9 Jun 2016
Categories: COPIES OF RECEIPTS/INVOICES
Exemptions Applied: Section 31
Request

Please provide a copy of the receipt or invoice submitted on claim number 478311

Response

IPSA holds the information that you request.

Under the MPs’ Scheme of Business Costs and Expenses (‘the Scheme’), all claims for reimbursement under the Scheme must be supported by evidence. You can view a copy of the Scheme on our website via this link. As such, we hold all supporting documentation provided in support of claims made by MPs.

The following information relating to this claim has already been published on our publication website.

Date

Category

Expense Type

Notes

Status

Reimbursed

 View invoice

12/01/2016

Office Costs Expenditure

Stationery Purchase

Printer toner

Allowed

59.36

Click to view invoice

12/01/2016

Office Costs Expenditure

Stationery Purchase

Outgoing post organiser

Allowed

6.44

Click to view invoice

12/01/2016

Office Costs Expenditure

Stationery Purchase

Batteries

Allowed

17.24

Click to view invoice

Please click the links above to view a copy of the invoices submitted by Mr Hamilton in support of the claim.

Exemptions applied

Section 31 – law enforcement

We have withheld the customer and invoice number contained within the invoice under Section 31(1)(a) (Law enforcement) of the FOI Act. This section of the Act states that information is exempt if its disclosure under the FOI Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the prevention (or detection) or crime. After considering the nature of the withheld information it is our opinion that were a disclosure to be made into the public domain it is probable that this information could be traced back to sensitive personal or commercial information which could be used for criminal activity. Although we recognise the public interest in transparency surrounding the publishing of information relating to MPs’ expenses, there is also a strong public interest in ensuring that we are able to protect our service users from the threat of being subjected to criminal activity. In our opinion the public interest in protecting the security of MPs and their property outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.