JAMES Duddridge has said he may pay back some of his expenses which he has claimed under the controversial second homes allowance.

The Tory MP for Rochford and Southend East agreed to a full interview with the Echo, in the wake of the scandal, which has dominated headlines for the last three weeks.

In 2005, Mr Duddridge used £7,000 of public money to refurbish his London flat, before switching claims to help fund a different property in the capital.

He refused to say he would hold a public meeting, but did not rule it out.

But Mr Duddridge did say he has been holding weekly surgeries in Southend and an out and about surgery regularly at various locations as well as answering e-mails, letters and phone calls about the expenses.

He said: “I would consider repaying it. Certainly if the scrutiny panel said I should and if the independent review body said it was wrong.”

Mr Duddridge said the whole scandal is making MPs weary and he feels frustrated by it causing such a distraction.

He said: “It’s a brilliant job. If I’m told to commute, or they cut the salary, I’d still do the job and find a way to do it.”

He invited the Echo out with him to meet residents on election day yesterday, visiting polling stations in Thorpe Bay and Great Wakering.

Window cleaner Marc Waldron, 40, of Poynings Avenue, Southchurch, was in Thorpe Bay Broadway working, and said he understood why MPs took advantage of the system.

He said: “Some have bent the rules, but things have been blown out of proportion. I think they should be given an amount of money and not get expenses.

“It’s human nature. You see the rules and bend them to see how far you can take it. If I was an MP, I’d play the system.

“I think it’s time James spoke to people. That’s all people want, for him to open up.”

The polling station at St Augustine’s Church, in Tyrone Road, Thorpe Bay, was reasonably busy with voters. Among them was Amanda Adams, 43, from Southchurch, and Yvonne Byford, 72, of Parkanaur Avenue, Thorpe Bay.

Mrs Adams said: “People have lost a lot of trust. I think there needs to be more checks and scrutinising before the claims are paid out.”

Mr Duddridge told them: “At the moment, everyone assumes we are all crooks. Those who have entered fraudulent claims should be prosecuted. What is also needed is a general election.”

DUDDRIDGE OPENS UP TO TACKLE BURNING QUESTIONS

You say that, in hindsight, you regret decorating your second home. Do you accept this shows bad judgment?

“This wasn’t bad judgment or naivety. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. If I thought it through we would have perhaps got somewhere nearer to Westminster with more space first of all. The fees office tell you the rules and rather naively I thought if I follow them it would be OK. It is absolutely right that we move to an environment which is totally transparent.”

Will you pay back those costs incurred with the decoration of your second home which you say you regret? Anything else you would consider repaying?

“I would consider repaying it. Certainly if the scrutiny panel said I should and if the independent review body said it was wrong.

I also will make sure I’m comfortable with what I have done and consider all my claims. I will also reconsider this when the Kelly review comes out. If I repay some now, people may see it as guilt, but I’m not a criminal. If I’m guilty it’s of misjudging public opinion and not being hard on myself than the rules dictated. I need to give people closure and be comfortable with why and what I did. Do I wish I hadn’t claimed for the redecorating ? Yes. Does it make it unethical or immoral? No.”

In addition to your second home in London, you also claim mileage for regular journeys between the constituency/home and Westminster. Is this fair?

“I travel to London by train and sometimes by car, and I think it’s justified as I see it as I have two places of work. My offices are across two locations. My overall travel costs are very low.”

What has been the reaction of Rochford and Southend East Conservative Association to details of your expenses?

“I have updated them on the background of my expenses and talked about what I have done and what I spent money on and have answered questions similar to these. It was a good spirited meeting. I know I have their support.”

You said you intend to reduce your expenses claims as a result of public anger. Tell us specifically what you are considering.

“I aim to make savings by using the internet for some replies to constituents, so postage costs and stationery costs should reduce. I do an out and about surgery and will look at whether I need a surgery in one place. I might not need one office and that would save £7,000, but it may not be popular with constituents. I’m now on a variable mortgage and interest payments have gone down.”

What impact has the expenses scandal had on you and your family? How do you feel about your profession being criticised all the time?

“I have questioned whether it’s worth it, but it is. Now and then it’s difficult to have clarity and vision. It has put a strain on my family. This situation frustrates me. I want to get back on with holding the Government to account and representing the constituents. We need a clearer simple system, maybe one increased salary. I would abolish travel and second home allowances and it would be highly regulated.”

The issue of a public meeting is key in the public’s mind. Will you now agree to an open meeting to allow people to challenge your claims?

“I am meeting the public and talking to them about their concerns. There may be a series of public meetings. It would be good to have publication of all the details of expenses and before the Kelly report, answer questions that remain. The reason it has resonated is we’re not doing a fantastic job.”