Michael Foster has been named and shamed on a list of the 172 MPs who voted in favour of the controversial expenses account earlier this month.

It allows MPs to claim as much as £24,000 to provide themselves with electrical equipment, kitchens and bathrooms for their second homes - a move which has been heavily criticised as many UK families struggle to make ends meet amid the current economic climate.

Local LibDem parliamentary hopeful Nick Perry was among the first to stick the boot in. He said: "The fact Michael Foster has voted the way he has is just one more example of how Labour is losing touch with the public.

"In an economic situation which is shaky for so many, it is obscene that MPs have voted this way."

Mr Foster, however, was quick to hit back, saying the entire subject had been misrepresented in the national press and that it was vital for MPs to be allowed to claim such an allowance for a second home.

The MP, who rents a bedsit on the Elephant and Castle in London, said: "I did not vote in favour of the John Lewis List. I voted against the proposed reforms which would have seen MPs given £30 a day without having to show receipts.

"I believe MPs should be accountable and that politics should be fully transparent. Therefore I think it is important MPs justify what they buy.

"I don't think it is unreasonable for MPs to have a second home in London and to be able to furnish it. Some will need more than others and some, especially the MPs with families or who live a long way away, will need a bigger property than others.

"I certainly do not claim the entire amount I am entitled to and the only things I have got for my bedsit in recent years is a washing machine and a small television.

"Every MP should recover the reasonable expenses they incur up to certain limits."

What do you think of Mr Foster's decision to vote against the reforms? Should MPs be allowed to claim so much? Leave your comments below.