Sinn Fein MPs may lose their right to claim expenses if they continue to fail to attend Parliament.
Speaking during a Westminster Hall debate yesterday afternoon, deputy Commons leader David Heath said the advancement of the Northern Ireland peace process over the past few years meant the was now "no good reason" for Sinn Fein MPs to boycott Westminster.
In December 2001 the Commons agreed to let MPs who had not taken their seats to have access to the House's facilities, including allowances.
Previously such a position had been rejected by both Speakers Boothroyd and Martin on the grounds that that the House did not permit what Boothroyd described as "associate membership”.
Heath said the then Labour government promoted the change in the rules in order to "encourage Sinn Fein to play a greater role in mainstream politics”.
"Since the decisions were taken, circumstances in Northern Ireland have changed considerably. We have a new devolutionary settlement, which is at the heart of the peace process," he said.
"The Belfast agreement is clear: Northern Ireland is, and will remain, part of the United Kingdom until or unless a majority of the people of Northern Ireland vote otherwise.
"Sinn Fein has accepted the consent principle set out in the agreement, and there is therefore no reason why its members should not take their seats at Westminster.
"Whatever arguments were made in 2001 and 2006, they were made in a different political context.
"Northern Ireland has moved on. The principle for the future must be that all elected Members should take their seats and play as full a role as possible as Members of the House."
But the Lib Dem MP pointed out that expenses were now governed by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) rather than MPs themselves.
"In addition to the changes in Northern Ireland, there have also been shifts in the parliamentary landscape that will need to be considered," he said.
Heath said Ipsa intended to "observe the status quo" by contining to pay Sinn Fein MPs their allowances.
And he noted that last Wednesday, Ipsa set out its position as follows:
"a government motion passed through the House of Commons in 2001 established the position that MPs who do not take the oath may claim expenses related to their parliamentary business. Ipsa regards itself as obliged to follow these motions and intends to do so unless the House decides otherwise."
Heath was responding to a debate triggered by DUP MP Nigel Dodds, who attacked the "special treatment" he said was afforded Sinn Fein MPs.
"There is only one elected party in the House that refuses to take its seats, so that policy is not driven by a need to address a general problem," he said.
"The problem is one single party seeking and getting preferential treatment.
"There is now a special status of MP, and the principle that the same is expected of and awarded to all members of the House equally has been abandoned.”
Dodds said it was one of the "greatest errors" of the previous Labour government to allow Sinn Fein MPs to claim expenses while they refused to take their seats in Westminster.
He added: "In the immediate aftermath of the coverage of the expenses scandal, it was revealed that Sinn Fein Members were claiming nearly £500,000 in accommodation costs for being in London primarily on parliamentary duties although they do not even attend the House.”
The Belfast North MP said the plan had obviously been to encourage Sinn Fein MPs to come to Parliament- effectively "killing abstentionism with kindness".
But he said their failure to attend "demonstrated the poverty of that particular argument".
Dodds set out his case in an article for ePolitix.com yesterday.
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.