'MPs brought disgrace on themselves' | Attempt to arrest wayward MPs | Darling should go, say constituents | First Lord of the Treasury | Your Darling reader

Three times Gordon Brown was given the chance yesterday to assure Alistair Darling of his future as Chancellor. Three times he declined.

The Prime Minister had for several days been pondering the idea of moving Mr Darling from the Treasury. It is a difficult decision — Mr Darling is popular with many ministers whereas his most likely replacement, Ed Balls, is seen by Blairites as divisive. But if Mr Brown wants to move him, Mr Darling made his job that little bit easier yesterday.

The Chancellor has been embroiled in the row for weeks, over claims that he “flipped” the designation of his second homes, and accountancy charges. Then late on Sunday came the allegation that he received cash after claiming for a service charge on a flat being let to a tenant. The Chancellor’s office issued a denial of wrongdoing and, after a conversation with Mr Darling, Mr Brown went on the Today programme to back him, though stopped short of saying that he would stay in his job. An hour later Mr Darling was owning up to a mistake, leaving Downing Street scrambling to catch up. Mr Brown’s spokesman was given an uncomfortable grilling at the morning briefing. Asked whether the Prime Minister was satisfied that the Chancellor had done nothing wrong, he could only reply that Mr Brown was glad that he had acted to “remove any ambiguity”.

Mr Brown continued to speak highly of Mr Darling through the day but on occasion talked of his performance as Chancellor in the past tense and refused to say whether he would still be in the job in a week.

In a round of broadcast interviews Mr Darling said that he had made a “mistake” and would repay the money. “I’m sorry about that, I unreservedly apologise,” he said. However, he denied claiming on two properties simultaneously and insisted that he did not want to be seen to have made “any gain”. Asked whether he was expecting to be removed from No 11 in a reshuffle, Mr Darling replied in an almost resigned tone: “It is up to the Prime Minister. He has got to decide the team that he wants to be in the next government . . . Gordon and I work very, very closely together but at the end of the day it is his call.”

Mr Brown then refused to say whether Mr Darling, or Hazel Blears, the Communities Secretary, who has also been criticised over her expenses claims, would keep their jobs. “They are doing a good job but I am not going to make any predictions about anything that is going to happen in the next week,” he said.

David Cameron, the Conservative leader, told the BBC that Mr Darling’s plight strengthened his calls for a general election to “cleanse” politics. “I think in the case of the Chancellor he is clearly in serious difficulties,” Mr Cameron said. “I think what matters is that the Prime Minister either backs or sacks him . . . Just leaving him hanging out to dry is very bad.” George Osborne, the Shadow Chancellor, said it was damaging to have the Chancellor’s fate hanging in the balance during a recession. “What are the public and international markets supposed to make of the fact that on three occasions today the Prime Minister has failed to express his confidence in his own Chancellor?” he asked.

Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, again called for Mr Darling to go. “I think that in a time of economic, as well as political crisis, it is absolutely right that the person who is in charge of the national finances should be someone who is regarded with moral authority, not just operating within technical rules, by the financial community and the country at large. I don’t think the Chancellor is in that position.”

Bob Thomson, a former Scottish Labour Party chairman, said that Mr Darling should resign over the disclosures about “flipping” second-home designations. “He is the person in charge of our tax regime and should be cleaner than clean,” Mr Thomson told The World At One on BBC Radio 4. “Changing the designation of your house four times in four years . . . I think that, quite honestly, [is] reprehensible.”

A new poll provided more evidence that Labour faced a huge reaction from voters. Research by Ipsos Mori found that the party’s support had slumped by 10 percentage points over the past month and was now running neck and neck with the Lib Dems on 18 per cent. For now Westminster is abuzz with Mr Darling’s future. Within days it will again be Mr Brown’s.

Last night a second Cabinet minister admitted claiming expenses for a property he was not living in. Geoff Hoon, the Transport Secretary, said that he had paid back £384 that he claimed for gas, electricity and a television licence on a property that he had left.

The case against

— Service charge

What he did: Ten days after becoming Chancellor in July 2007 he claimed £1,004 for a service charge on his flat in Kennington to cover the six months to December 2007. In September 2007 he designated his Downing Street flat as his second home. The rules state that an MP may not claim on more than one property at a time.

What he says: “I’m sorry. I claimed that money because I was living in the flat. At the time this claim became due . . . I didn’t move into Downing Street for 2-3 months.”

Verdict: He broke the spirit and letter of the rules. He should not have claimed — he knew he was moving out — and the Fees Office should not have authorised it.

— Serial flipper

What he did: Switched designated second home three times in four years: Edinburgh to Kennington in 2005, then to Downing St in 2007 and back to Edinburgh in 2008.

What he says: “I have tried to do what is right and do what is required to make sure I live up to the standard I’m expected.”

Verdict: It looks bad. Why does a senior minister not know where he lives? Weeks after moving into the Kennington flat, he spent £4,995 kitting it out. Within the rules.

— Charging for accountancy fees

What he did: Charged the taxpayer more than £1,400 for accountants to complete personal tax returns.

What he says: He has confirmed that he declared the services as a benefit in kind and paid tax on it.

Verdict: Highly embarrassing because it allows others to claim that he found his tax returns too complex to complete by himself.

Money Central: The 10 weirdest MPs' expenses claims

Times Recommends

• Why Witherspoon is highlighting domestic violence
• No, MP does not stand for Mostly Plastered
• Don’t bottle out of your champagne moment