Gove: The full story

Stop being a Sock Puppet Fraser

Oh please. He made this 'frank' revelation *after* he knew these facts were going to come out. Of course he flipped. It's a pity you've sucked (up).

THX1138

If he gave up his Times Column he would have more time to spend with both his family and his constituents.

I shouldn't be too mean I do quite like the guy but I can't help thinking of the great Jay Leno quote.

“Politics is just show business for ugly people”.

disillusioned

Unfortunately Fraser I don't think the detail is going to help in this situation. The truth is that we have lost all faith in our elected representatives. Gove has to go in order for Cameron to have a clean break with this issue. Only those that are whiter than white can remain. Gove will be missed, but if that is the price that needs to be paid then so be it.

Anand

Glad to hear it, we like Govey, I have high hops for the Education system in this country and hes the man for the job.

Andy

THX1138:

"If he gave up his Times Column he would have more time to spend with both his family and his constituents."

1) His Times column is on a Monday, so he'd be writing it on the weekend while in the constituency anyway

2) You don't need to be in a newspaper office to write a column. Just do it from home.

I've always liked Michael Gove, so it's good to see that he's not actually one of the fiddlers.

john

Sounds encouraging, but a few other Tories should bite the bullet. Are you reading this Francis?

Gawain

This is an unfortunate example of what happens when journalists whip up a moral crisis. Remember Back to Basics and Diana's funeral. This is no longer rational and Gove should go. The country cannot afford another Labour Government or a hung Parliament and one man is less important than the country as a whole.

From the reports on Sky some of the spin the Telegraph are putting on these stories is questionable. I am afraid journalists aren't coming out of this too well either.

Thrasymachus

Come on Speccie, this double standard is a little glaring don't you think? Where's the moral indignation of a mere few posts ago?

colin

What's that you say?

Gove's got an excuse, you say?

Sorry I can't hear you, he's as bad as the rest.

What all this boils down to is judgement, and, like the rest of them, his judgement appears to be flawed, which means he's not up to the job of being a cabinet minister.

Where are six hundred odd Martin Bell's when you need them?

Steve

Sod him. He, like Maude, has been caught "flipping".

They should be sacked. That's my money these jackals have been stealing. No excuses, no weasely reasons.

Cameron needs to show- no, proove- that he's got more guts and integrity than Brown,

Cath

He has my sympathy. As someone with the misfortune to have to commute into London from Surrey Heath I know how diabolical the train service is. If I had the option on moving my family into London I would certainly take it.

TGF UKIP

I'm sure all those guys who work in the City and live in Surrey Heath are going to be vastly sympathetic!

Big mistake, Fraser, we all know you're a mate and fan of Gove (he was one of the pack after all) and all this is a bit too fast off the mark.

The Speccie closing ranks round its Tory special mates. Now there's a surprise.

And by the way, I notice how you carefully avoid spelling out just how far/close Surrey Heath is to the Palace of Delights.

H

They are all calling for the system to be changed, nobody is falling of their sword.

Any attempt to sack people in the public sector for example at Stafford NHS trust or in the Baby P case has to be shown-up for what it is now.

At Stafford the board members and managers followed targets, and yet the government insisted that they should have known better and demanded heads should roll. No they aren't taking responsibility. The hypocrasy is palpable!

If this heralded the introduction of true systems thinking into government approaches then this would be a positive outcome. They could increase quality and decrease costs!

rhys burriss

I have always had an instinct that prissy-pissy soi disant intellectual Gove was a shit - this proves it.

Verity

Colin - "Where are six hundred odd Martin Bell's when you need them? Perhaps the thought of running up 600 ghastly white suits was too daunting for the tailors. (Or they may just be thinking, "Martin Bell's what?")

edward

Personally I'd prefer the current rules not to be changed bar the second home allowance. Any 'independent' change of rules/sign off will just mean secrecy. The MPs will say there is no need for the expenses to be made public and we will never know who has claimed what. I'd prefer to know those details and then make a judgement.

Jim

So it's the wife and children who are at fault? What a load of hogwash, normal people have to commute and don't see their families as much as they'd like to.
It seems you've mistaken intellectualism for arrogance, because arrogance is what this is. Special, precious Michael gets a free house because he can't cope with what a million other people have to put up with everyday. Poor dear.

JohnAnt

His explanation is genuinely plausible: that route is lousy, particularly at night, and as a shadow minister Gove will have lots of evening stuff to do in Westminster/London during the week. It's not your typical 9-5 city commute. And it's not as if he then went in for some dodgy property deal. He just switched his two properties to reflect the family occupation time spent in each. If he wants to upsticks twice a week with wife and kids that's up to him. Sounds hell to me.
I think he gets away with his one strike this time, with a suspended sentence for any repeat - or if we all find out he was lying!

Sally Chatterjee

Very weak. It's 75 minutes on the train from Camberley to Waterloo and then a short walk across the river to Westminster. Gove could be "door to door" in 90 minutes a day on the train. By car, he could do it faster driving down the M3 if he's working late.

Many have far longer commutes but can't claim for a second home from their employer. What makes MPs a class above everyone else?

If the strain on his family life was too much, he should change job, not twist rules to soak the taxpayer. Many others will gladly take his safe seat.

colin

Verity:

Point taken about the white suits. But, what a brilliant opportunity for the electorate to halt the rise of the political careerists, who, to my mind are largely responsible for this disaster.

Obnoxio The Clown

OK, so if I took on a job in London that involved commuting and found that it was an enormous pain in the arse, do you think my employer would just blithely fund me to move somewhere more convenient?

Didn't think so.

Mike Stallard

If someone makes excuses after the event, then, surely, that is very different from their offering a statement in September well before the scandal was uncovered?
I do not think that I blame Mr Gove here. Anyway, we need him - our local Comp stinks.

Scottish Cheeselog

Had he claimed unreasonable amounts of money for the Surrey Heath home before moving? And did he claim unreasonable amounts of money for the London home after moving? His story seems perfectly plausible to me, and if he didn't buy stuff like 17 silk cushions or a new TV/sofa/bathplug (or bathroom) in both places, I'd say he's been claiming within the spirit of the rules as well as the letter of them.

Succumbing to hysteria is only going to ratify it. Each of these MPs, whatever party, should be scrutinised dispassionately and judged on the facts, not on media-fueled spin and feeding-frenzies.

Fergus Pickering

Gawain are you saying Gove should be sacked even though he hasn't done anything 'for the greater god'. What greater good would that be? So the Tories stand for bending with the wind, do they? And as for all these brave commuters, if they are city types then they barely do a thirty hour week anyway. When I worked in London nd my wife lived in Canterbury, I had a flat. Since I often didn't finish work till seven, eight, nine, I really couldn't face a couple of hours commuting. Gove's explanation sounds OK. If you want to sack some people, then sack Duncan, Grayling and Maude. Especially sack Maude. Can't stand the man.

jennywren

I agree that Gove has done nothing excessive or immoral here. The rules as written are designed to cope with the situation in which he found himself. He can hardly be criticised for taking advantage of them.

Susan Hill

rhys burris. That is an unacceptable remark. You may disapprove of Michael Gove, as a politician or in view of the latest revelations re expenses but he is an honourable and decent man and one of the best hopes for the rather weak and wet present Tory front bench. Not one word of your slur applies to him and I find your tone distasteful. These comment columns allow robust speaking but this is gutter-level.

True Bred Pomponian

But there was no need for him to book a second load of expenses. That was his choice

Forlornehope

It may well be that Gove's situation is genuine and above reproach. However, in the present climate anything that is not completely and transparently clean is going to be impossible to defend. If the "Patrick Mercer" principle is applied, one inch out of line should be enough to cost him his job. After all if five black sergeants-major insisting that Mercer didn't have a racist thought in his head couldn't help him, there should be no safety net for Camerons friends.

Ghillie

Amid all the hysteria, it might be useful to note that Gove's current arrangement reflects precisely what the second home system originally intended. If he has not spent lavishly on furnishings, molecatchers, etc, like so many other MPs, he should be given another chance. There is no comparison, for example, between him and the Hon? Member for Luton.

But current hysteria - much of it justified - clouds rational judgement.

Charlie

Grove's home in Surrey is in commuting distance of Westminster. If he had to work late he could book himself into a hotel, or take a late night train and pay for a taxi at the other end. Many people work away from home, only seeing the family at weekends or every 3 months- construction , oil, mining and industries; armed forces; merchant navy etc etc, . Commuting and working late has become a fact of life for many people. If someone offered to stay in a hotel on a regular basis they can often reduce the rates.

beat lad

so Gove has done nothing wrong at all, good we need him to sort out the mess left by balls! on the other hand its a great op to get rid of duncan, the mans a liability!

Myles

Just as junior politicians entered parliament with high minded principles and then succumbed to sleaze, so Fraser Nelson looks like transforming from probing journalist to Establishment PR man. Fraser, your whitewashing of Gove is a disgrace - all previous respect in which I held you (a lot) has gone.

John Ware

Even if the explanation for the house move is accepted, why does he need to buy lavish home furnishing at taxpayer's expense?

blueharry

Gillie writes, 'If he has not spent lavishly on furnishings, molecatchers, etc, like so many other MPs, he should be given another chance.'

From the Telegraph

Over a five-month period between December 2005, and April 2006, he spent more than £7,000 on the semi-detached house, which Mr Gove, 41, and his wife Sarah Vine, a journalist, bought for £430,000 in 2002. Around a third of the money was spent at Oka, an upmarket interior design company established by Lady Annabel Astor, Mr Cameron’s mother-in-law.

Mr Gove bought a £331 Chinon armchair from there, as well as a Manchu cabinet for £493 and a pair of elephant lamps for £134,50.

He also claimed for a £750 Loire table – although the Commons’ authorities only allowed him to claim £600 – a birch Camargue chair worth £432 and a birdcage coffee table for £238.50. Other claims in the five-month period included Egyptian cotton sheets from the White Company, a £454 dishwasher, a £639 range cooker, a £702 fridge freezer and a £19.99 Kenwood toaster.

Mr Gove even claimed for a £34.99 foam cot mattress in Feb 2006 from Toys 'R’ Us – despite children’s equipment being banned under Commons rules. He also charged the taxpayer for eight coffee spoons and cake forks, worth £5.95 each, four breakfast knives and a woven door mat worth £30. A claim for new patio furniture worth £219, including a four-seater bistro dining set, was turned down by Commons officials.

woody

Stop trying to defend the in defensible. There is no "change in circumstances" and the taxpayer isn't interested in how much time these people spend with their family. If the family can't hack it at their own expense they should find another job. Besides, Gove is a flag-waver for a foreign racist regime with a war crimes record as long as your arm, so brings shame on Parliament that way too. As Steve says, sod him.

Richard T

Your special pleading doesn't wash. My heart bleeds for him having to move house to suit himself having been elected to the seat he manoeuvred to get. Simple question; why should Mr Gove be paid tax free public money to move to meet his own preferences? Simple answer; he shouldn't, just like the rest of us.

David Bean

Ghillie's comment is absolutely spot on. People may not like the fact that MPs have second home allowances and that one of the reasons for this is to make politics a more family-friendly profession - and given the rate of marital breakdowns in politics, surely this can hardly be a bad thing - but the fact is that this system had been in place and unquestioned for years, and had it not been for certain MPs abusing the system quite flagrantly we should not even be having this conversation. To argue that Michael Gove should be sacked or punished in any way for doing what the rules intended, in the way they intended them and for the reasons they were intended, is utterly ridiculous. It is also highly dangerous for the future of our politics, because if you're going to say that MPs should get into serious trouble despite having abided by the spirit as well as the letter of the rules just because the political goalposts have been moved, what sane person would ever go into it?

On the strength of this report Michael Gove has been utterly exhonerated, and anyone suggesting a lingering stain on his character ought to be ashamed of themselves.

George Laird

Dear Fraser

I read your piece seems plausible, then I popped over to Craig Murray’s blog; he has a different take on Michael Gove’s expenses position and a few other comments to boot on Gove.

Having read his blog, don’t expect to be on the Christmas card list from him; he says;

“I would take the word of Ronnie Biggs before I took the word of Frazer Nelson”.

Can you possibly clear this matter up by letting us know how you stored the information of the Gove interview? Was it done electronically or hand written notes?

Here are some questions which I would suggest don’t exactly clear Gove in the Harman Court of Public Opinion.

Gove’s London residence was listed as a second home and he claimed to have it furnished by the taxpayer. Then he switched and claimed for furnishing his Surrey home in so far as my understanding of what is in the public domain

So Gove had two bites of the cherry; is that morally right? Whenever he needs work done he can just change on his own whim to get more taxpayer money.

By being clever he has in effect furnished his both his homes at our expense, is that within the even the spirit of the rules? Is that what the second home allowance is for? Doesn’t that type of behaviour question Gove’s suitable to be a Minister of State?

You say the move was for family reasons, given that expenses are solely for the benefit of the MP alone, it is even worse than the Labour MP claiming for a cot which was part of another post by Peter Hoskins.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3600896/the-next-chapter-of-the-horror-story.thtml

You say you have the “full” story; unfortunately the full story isn’t on here, just like the full story wasn’t on your piece of the 24th September 2008, we are getting a version.

This is a PR attempt at face saving for Gove by tossing in a wife and few kids as the human sandbags.

Given that by switching homes and getting each furnished by the taxpayer, will Gove repay the full amount of taxpayer money on one the homes? Does he intend to keep the benefit in kind he received at the taxpayers’ expense?

If he does then how is he different from a sleazy Labour MP using the system to their advantage?

Finally, Craig Murray makes the point;

“What the Gove affair demonstrates beyond doubt is that, should the Tories get in power, those trendy Tory blogs will be even more lickspittle yes-men, purveyors of excuses for the inexcusable, servile followers of uncaring leaders, than NuLab blogs are now”.

On such an issue as this, the Spectator should be impartial and report facts; my view is that the Spectator cheapens and does itself a disservice by attempting to shield people because they are a ‘Tory pals’.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

David Lindsay

Bye, bye, Michael Gove.

Take the rest of Policy Exchange and the Henry Jackson Society with you as you leave Parliament.

And close the door behind you.

Fraser Nelson

George Laird, do you seriously think I concocted those quotes? My interview with Gove was taped. If anyone serious questioned the authenticity, I'd put the audio online.

And for those who think I'm doing Gove's PR, well, you're entitled to call it as you see it. One of the joys of CoffeeHouse is getting a kicking anytime I say something nice about an MP - Jim Murphy, Purnell, Gove - but they are not all villains. It just seems a lot like it at the moment.

Ivan D

In your opinion, just how classy was it of Michael to use public funds to buy stuff from Dave's mother-in-law? In terms of illuminating a certain M.O., this is the single most pungent detail for me.

Chingford Man

My last comment didn't go through, perhaps because I compared MPs to certain 4 legged beasts best served with apple sauce.

If your constituents can commute into London, so should you. And whilst a work-life balance is important, the taxpayer shouldn't be paying so that the Goves can have a particularly good one.

As for his colleagues, sometimes you just wish that Gene Hunt was a real copper.

I Lane

Fraser, why do you suppose hundreds of thousands of people commute to London every day. Is it because they don't wish to spend time with their family? Gove is getting the taxpayer to fund what many commuters would like to do, a house in town for the week and another for the weekend. Both furnished and not immodestly furnished either - by the taxpayer. Perhaps he should offer to repay the £7,000 he spent before flipping, until he does he is a crook just like the rest of them

George Laird

Dear Fraser

"George Laird, do you seriously think I concocted those quotes?"

If I was minded to call you a liar then I think you know me well enough to know I would do so and in print and with my name attached.

In this case I haven't called you a liar; I merely asked if you could clear the matter up.

I don't see that as an unreasonable request given that the information wasn't previously in the public domain.

Finally, for the record Fraser, when I call people liars; I only use third party irrefutable proof.

The reason; I wouldn't victimise innocent people.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Sara

I'm quite prepared to believe that Gove and h si wife needed to switch their main residence to London sinc eboth work antisocial hours which makes commuting difficult. I'm nto however prepared to condone the fursnighing of even one let alone two houses at tax-payers expense esp with lusury goods such as many of them have chosen. Most of us do with decent 2nd hand stuff from eg local auction houses or eBay!

The incoming Govt must ensure that the 2nd home allowance is based on the going rate for a 2 bed furnished flat in a London borough such as Battersea ie not Westminster prices. If any MP then chooses to live somewhere more expensive, or to buy (ie play the property developer) that can be their choice and they pay the extra. There could shoud also be a limited fund for eg necessary repairs and services.

The problem is that the expenses system was devised precisely as a way to push up MPs' salaries without it beinn being too obvious, so causing a storm in the media - how badly has that rebounded ont hem!

Neil Hampton

Michael Gove is my MP and he is a good man. I have met him on many occasions and he has always done his upmost for myself and my family, as well as for many other people I know, in tandem with stellar work on education reform. I think many laymen underestimate quite what is required to be both a Member of Parliament and a Shadow Minister and the havoc a full diary can wreak on family life.

Karen

Gove is my local MP. He represents many constituents who are Forces personnel. They see little of their families in the current climate, my husband is away in Afghanistan for six months.
However, most galling is within this constituency there are forces families living in grade 4 accommodation (the lowest grade)!
'Flipping' and creaming off public money for these 'expenses' is unjustifiable when those families remain renting shoddy housing for the long term!

Chris

Just to put things in perspective. According to the independent "They Work For You" website, Michael Gove ranked joint 1st in both 2007/2008 and 2006/2007 for Additional Costs Allowances, with a spend of 23,083 pounds last year and 22,110 pounds the previous year. As we know, the maximum that can be claimed is 24,000 pounds.

Craig Murray

Nelson,

You could put an audio online. I should like to hear it. But what evidence might you offer that it is not recently made?

Nick Thompson

To put this in perspective it probably takes 15 minutes for Gove from leaving his desk to get to the tube station, 2 mins tube ride to Waterloo and 1hr 15 minutes to Camberley and then maybe 10-15 minutes to his house. Not including time spent mincing round Waterloo station waiting for the train. I would say that is comfortably a 1hr 45 minute round trip each way if not 2hrs.
I hope our MPs have better things to do with their time than spend 4 hours travelling to work and back.

Mary Yarg

I'm actually quite shocked at Michael Gove. His expenses last year according to the Camberley News (10th April) were £152,071. Surrey Heath is about 1 hour by train from Waterlloo, with a fabulous 15 min walk across Westminster Bridge to get to Parliament. Where is the need for this level of expense claim?
I had thought he was above this sort of greed.

Rhys Burriss

I based my instinctual feeling about Gove entirely on my observations of him on programmes such as Newsnight Review. He just does come across as vain and pompous - 'Look at me I'm an intellectual'. Not that he has anything particularly original to say . Plus his plans for schools are half-baked and will never come off. He always looked shifty. Then there was that move from specs to blinking in contacts. Just all false. Now we have direct evidence of fraud - claiming first that House A; then that House B was the second residence - and oh how convenient that this happened in sequence after first House A then House B needed expensive refurbishments. Paying back the money ( if he pays back every penny) may be good mitigation - albeit it is after being found out rather than after a pang of conscience. But it does not provide a defence to the allegation of obtaining by deception. He can tell his story to a jury of Londoners or Surrey commuters and see what shrift they give him of it.

nelly the elephant

Come on guys! Michael lives miles away from Westminster. 27 miles is a long journey in politics.

OKa he already has a home in Kensington, but until he got the elephant lamps plugged in to his Manchu designed dashboard, how could he transport a child's cot mattress such huge distances?

I'm full of admiration for Michael. He has not claimed for a duck-house. Tho' he might have ducked claims for a house, or two