Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, was under fire today for claiming thousands of pounds of Commons expenses for her family house by listing it as her ‘second home’, while effectively lodging with her sister.

Ms Smith is able to claim the maximum £24,006 a year in taxpayer funded allowances for her £300,000 property in the West Midlands because she lists her ‘main home’ as a London property owned by her sister, where she says she spends the bulk of her time.

Campaigners told the Mail on Sunday that her claims, of £116,000 over several years, were “morally questionable”. The Home Secretary insisted she had done nothing wrong and her expenses claims were in line with Commons regulations.

“The Home Secretary has always abided fully with Parliament’s clear rules on expenses and has long-standing written approval from the Parliamentary Fees office for any agreed expenses,” a spokesperson said.

Ms Smith’s husband and two children live in the West Midlands property and a spokesperson said the Home Secretary tended to “go home Thursday evenings” and return to London on “Sunday or Monday”. Her website says that she “still lives in Redditch”.

Her spokesperson insisted: “She spends the majority of her time in London attending to government business and has full approval for any associated expenses relating to her second home in her West Midlands constituency.”

The spokeswoman denied Ms Smith was “lodging” with her sister, and said the two “shared the house”. She said the Home Secretary “makes a contribution to the household”, but would not confirm whether she pays rent.

The Home Secretary has not done anything wrong under Commons regulations, which allow MPs to nominate which are their main and second homes. The main residence is deemed to be that where the MP “spends more nights than any other”.

Recent guidance said “value for money” for the taxpayer could be used as a factor if there was doubt which home was the main one.

Norman Baker, the Liberal Democrat MP, told the newspaper that Ms Smith’s claims seemed “extraordinarily bad value for the taxpayer”.

“This suggests that the steps taken to eliminate unsatisfactory elements of the housing allowance system have not yet been completed,” he said.

Matthew Elliott, Chief Executive of The Taxpayers’ Alliance, said: “Many people looking at this situation will consider it morally questionable that Jacqui Smith should have claimed this allowance. Now that Parliament’s reputation has been tarnished so much, it is up to senior ministers to be whiter than white. Jacqui Smith has not done this.”

The newspaper also claimed that Ms Smith was costing the taxpayer £200,000 a year in police protection by choosing to live at her sister’s house rather than a “grace and favour” ministerial home in Whitehall. If she lived in one of the vacant ministerial properties, which already have police protection, she would not be allowed to claim the second home expenses.

Ms Smith’s spokesperson said: “She has lived with her sister in London since she was a backbench MP and is perfectly happy with it. Most people would think that is a nice thing.”

Times Recommends

• The bright side of this winter rain
• Story behind the picture: Snow Leopard, 2008
• Times Charity Appeal: The Place2Be