The official release of MPs’ expenses could be delayed until the last day of June because of a stand-off between MPs and House of Commons officials.

MPs on the committee that oversees the running of Parliament are desperate to end the drip-drip release of expenses data by publishing it in a redacted form on the internet.

Others, though, are arguing with the Parliamentary Fees Office over what should be redacted, suggesting that they are trying to prevent publication of some entries which could seen as embarrassing.

Commons officials say they will need another four weeks to meet lawyers’ demands before they are ready to publish the details. This tussle comes as it emerged that the external body promised by Gordon Brown to go through every MP’s claims will not be created until January at the earliest. It will be voted through Parliament in the autumn.

Publication of the receipts submitted as part of claims had been expected on June 16 after a promise by Michael Martin, the Speaker, to release the details as early as possible.

Officials are under instructions from lawyers to double-check all the details due to be put in the public domain. This comes despite them having had more than a year to prepare the data. The High Court ordered the release of the information in May 2008.

Bob Castle, the Commons Data Protection and Freedom of Information Officer, has warned that Parliament could be sued if details that should have been kept private, such as credit card data, are released.

The failure of Parliament to bring forward publication of information already partially released is the latest sign of the flat-footed response of MPs to the expenses scandal.

Members are desperately trying to ensure publication before a new Speaker is elected on June 22, with the Thursday or Friday of the preceding week the preferred options. At one point officials suggested publication the same day. But MPs believe this would not allow them to start the reforms needed to clean up Parliament without becoming bogged down in expenses revelations.

“We want the new Speaker to start with a clean slate, even if it means publishing just three or four days in advance. But there is only a 50 per cent chance of this happening,” said one.

MPs have also been warned of the security implications of private details being published — for example those of a cleaner in a Sinn Féin MP’s flat. If the cleaner lived in a Protestant area in Belfast and was attacked, Parliament could be liable for compensation, it was suggested.

There was speculation last night over the future of Andrew Walker, Parliament’s director of resources. He is disliked by some MPs for demanding receipts for claims in 2003. Before then, Members did not need to submit documentation for mortgage claims.

Moderniser MPs believe that he failed to crack down on those who were claiming expenses that were not “wholly, exclusively and necessarily” for their role as an MP.

— Boris Johnson claimed more than £100,000 of taxpayers’ money to buy a farmhouse for his family in Thame, close to his Oxfordshire constituency. The London Mayor paid £640,000 for the house after being elected MP for Henley. He claimed £105,632 in Additional Costs Allowances between 2003 and 2008, including £23,083 in the year before he resigned as an MP. He also tried to claim £16.50 for a Remembrance Sunday wreath, but this was rejected by the Fees Office. Two weeks ago he paid £2 million for a new home in Angel, on the edge of the City.

Times Recommends

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