Leaders in expenses warning to MPs

Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he was ready to consider withdrawing the party whip from Labour MPs who refuse to repay expenses, while David Cameron said Tories who did not co-operate would be barred from standing for the party.

The warnings came amid signs of deep anger at Westminster over the audit of expenses carried out by former Whitehall mandarin Sir Thomas Legg.

Senior Labour backbencher Sir Stuart Bell said there was "a sense of grievance" among MPs that Sir Thomas has decided to impose a retrospective cap on expense claims for cleaning and gardening costs at their second homes.

And Conservative former minister Ann Widdecombe said there was "a big question of the legality" of the decision, which is expected to result in five or even six-figure repayment demands for some MPs.

Mr Cameron said that any Tory MP who refused to pay back sums demanded by Sir Thomas would be barred from standing for the party in the coming General Election. And when Mr Brown was asked whether he was ready to withdraw the whip from Labour MPs, he told reporters: "If, of course, people are not prepared to cooperate, then we will have to consider that action."

Mr Brown has agreed to pay back more than £12,400 for cleaning, gardening and decoration costs, and urged other ministers to comply with Sir Thomas's findings.

And Mr Cameron told GMTV: "In the end, if people are asked to pay back money and if the authorities determine that money should be paid back and they don't pay it back, in my view, they can't stand as Conservative MPs."

Writing to MPs on Monday to set out the provisional findings of his review of expense claims over the past five years, Sir Thomas explained that he had decided on a £2,000-a-year limit for cleaning and £1,000 for gardening costs because no maximum level had previously been set.

"Some limits must be regarded as having been in place to prevent disproportionate and unnecessary expenditure from the public purse," he wrote.

Miss Widdecombe told Sky News: "I think he has exceeded his remit - I think he has done so to meet a very widespread concern that people were using the second allowance as a form of income, but in fact that is a concern for the other review from Sir Christopher Kelly."