As if it isn’t bad enough that they defraud the taxpayer through their expense claims to such an extent that the CPS has felt necessary to prosecute them – the first time so many parliamentarians have been brought before the courts since the build up to the Civil War – the three Labour MPs are trying to claim immunity.

Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine… have employed leading constitutional lawyers to argue that their conduct cannot be tried in a criminal court and that only Parliament can discipline them.

It is feared that the prosecution case against them could be delayed by months of legal wrangling over whether the MPs are right to assert that their actions are covered by parliamentary privilege…

One of the main components of parliamentary privilege is “exclusive cognisance” which states that Parliament must have “sole control” over its own affairs. This also extends to Parliament having the power to “discipline its own members for misconduct”.

It is understood that the MPs believe their expense claims are also covered by privilege. This is because the expenses scheme was administered by Parliament through its fees office and all claims related to their work as MPs. (The Telegraph)

Parliamentary privilege?! These three have claimed £60,000 between them (David Chaytor: £20,000 for IT services and rent; Elliott Morley: £30,000 interest on a paid-off mortgage; Jim Devine: £9,000 for cleaning and stationery). Fraudulently claiming expnses is illegal, and they should be prosecuted and dealt with according to the law.

They must not be allowed to trot out the “parliamantary privilege” defence to save them from this. That is there to protect MPs for being prosecuted for what they say in the Chamber and to allow them to do their job without fear of being sued. But these expense claims were by their very nature – the fact that they have been deemed unacceptable by Legg and serious enough for the CPS to wish to prosecute over – had nothing to do with carrying out their job as an MP but everything to do with lining their pockets at our expense.

This privilege should not be available to parliamentarians who are not worthy of the title “Right Honourable”. And these three are right at the top of that list.