BEFORE my unwelcome appearance in the Daily Telegraph I had already decided to call this meeting so that we could have a frank exchange about the highly controversial matters that have arisen in the last few weeks. I fully understand the strong emotions that are aroused by the thought that tax payer’s money - your money - is being spent on frivolous matters and worse possibly, even fraudulently.

Before we have questions I would like to deal with the facts of my own case.

In 2002 I took out a mortgage on a semi-detached house in Fulham and I claimed the cost of this on my Parliamentary allowance and have been doing so ever since without a break. I also submitted my mortgage statement with my internal claim form. The Mortgage statement makes it clear that I have a London mortgage and how much it is and how much interest I pay. From the records of 2003 it is clear that I put the address in Herefordshire in the wrong box on the form and for the next 23 months neither I nor the Fees Office noticed the mistake and I signed it off in a routine manner. It was a mistake and I apologise for my error.

I hope you understand that this error made no financial difference to me in any way. I deeply resent the implication that I had a “phantom” mortgage. Unfortunately it is real. In 2006 the error was pointed out to me and I immediately put it right and thought no more of the matter. I rather doubt that at that time even the most hostile newspaper would have printed the fact that I had filled out a form wrongly particularly since it would not benefit me in any way at all.

There can be no doubt that the system completely failed and while it should have protected the tax payer it should also have made matters clear to Members of Parliament when they made claims for items that clearly fell outside the ethics of the system. A good many of you in this room will have submitted claims for expenses in the course of your business and an arbitrator has decided whether to pay them or not. Most Members of Parliament believed that the Fees Office was that arbitrator. I do not wish to get diverted into discussing other individual cases but there is no doubt that the system was pushed to its limit and beyond and a new scheme must be devised to allow fair expenses to be paid so that MPs can carry out their jobs properly and so that the interests of the tax payer have far greater authority than in the past. Members of Parliament pay tax like any other person and if any have sought to avoid paying it fraudulently then they should be and will be treated like anyone else.

I would like to thank those of you who have sent kind messages of support and in particular my dear wife Milly. I have no doubt that this story will continue to run but I hope you will accept that I have sought to keep within the rules and the spirit of the rules.

I know that being in the national newspapers is deeply unpleasant for any of us and there is very little chance to respond but I am committed to openness and support David Cameron’s lead on this. We need a General Election and with a new Speaker we must have the sort of reforms that will deliver a system and a democracy we can all have confidence in and be proud of.