I was one of the first 11 MPs to publish all my expenses online. I have always believed in greater transparency and believe all public servants - including MPs - should be fully accountable for the money they spend on behalf of taxpayers. I no longer claim for a second home and personally bear the additional cost of running a home near parliament as well as in Farnham - something that helps me to be effective both locally and on the national stage.

You can also see that I am one of the hundred lowest claiming MPs in parliament.

You can see my most up to date expenses here (just follow the step by step instructions and search for my name).

When I submitted expenses I did not expect them to be made public. I must therefore apologise for the fact that some of them have been filled in messily. The first few months of any MP elected to parliament for the first time is somewhat chaotic, and filling in expenses claims was not one of my priorities. It may therefore help you to understand them by reading the following explanatory notes which answers some of the most commonly asked questions.  This also lists mistakes in my expenses that have been identified to date.

Prior to the recent election my Liberal Democrat opponent quite naturally tried to make as much of this as possible. This is politics! Quite a number of his claims were inaccurate, though. If you want to hear my side of the story, please read my rebuttals page where I rebutted some of his more outrageous claims.

The Committee for Standards and Privileges published its report on me in December 2009 concerning the issue of my agent's use of my Farnham home. Essentially I allowed my agent to stay free of charge mid-week to save her having to commute back to Sussex. The report concluded that I did not benefit personally from the arrangement and did not use taxpayers funds to subsidise the local Conservative party. However I accept that because someone else was using the house – albeit free of charge – I should have reduced the amount claimed and so I have offered to repay £9,558.50 accordingly. I am very relieved the investigation is now over - and particularly welcome the confirmation by the committee that this was a misunderstanding of the rules which involved no personal financial benefit to me.

I have always campaigned for openness and transparency in politics. Read why I think the expenses scandal can be a good thing for democracy in Britain.