MPs' spouses


Does IPSA hold a list of MP’s spouses that can be compared against for claims that work in the civil service? If so can that list be provided under and FOI request.


IPSA holds some of the information that you request.

We do not hold a list of spouses of MPs.  We do hold information relating to ‘connected parties’. 

The term ‘connected party’ is defined in the MPs’ Scheme of Business Costs and Expenses (‘the Scheme’) as:

  1. A spouse, civil partner or cohabiting partner of the member;

  2. parent, child, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece of the member or of a spouse, civil partner or cohabiting partner of the member; or

  3. a body corporate, a firm or a trust with which the MP is connected as defined in section 252 of the Companies Act 2006.

MPs must complete a connected party declaration when employing staff members, stating whether the employee is or is not a connected party, as defined by the Scheme.

We publish annualised data that includes the names of all MPs who have declared to IPSA that they employ a connected party and the name of that connected party.  This annualised data can be found via this link to our publication website.  The annualised data for 2010/11 is already available on our website and the annualised data for 2011/12 will be published on our website on 6 September 2012.

The FOIA states that information that is accessible by other means or that is intended for future publication is not subject to release. Therefore, as the information you have requested is either already available on our website or will shortly be published on our website, it is exempt from disclosure under section 21 of the FOIA (information accessible to applicant by other means) and under Section 22(1) of the FOIA (Information intended for future publication).

In relation to our application of the exemption at section 22(1) of the FOIA, we have considered whether the public interest in releasing the information outweighs the application of the exemption. It is our opinion that the public interest is best served by publishing the information at set dates, rather than on an ad hoc basis, as this way a clear and complete set of information is published, which should also avoid causing confusion. It is for these stated reasons that the application of the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

18 July 2012
Exemptions Applied:
Section 21