A LIBERAL MP whose ­husband once failed to pay a $1 million tax bill will be forced to show what taxpayer-funded expenses she claimed for him after an embarrassing backdown by the Federal Government.

The Finance Department has backflipped on a ruling that politicians could hide the names of family members who enjoy taxpayer-funded travel after The Courier-Mail appealed the move to block expenses relating to Ryan MP Jane Prentice and her husband Ian.

The agency also admitted its initial freedom of information ruling was wrong ­because its scope was too ­narrow and will now release other travel by Mr Prentice ­beyond just airfares.

In a further embarrassment, the department has admitted it was told by the Information Commissioner that such information should not be hidden.

Mrs Prentice claimed thousands of dollars worth of family expenses during her first term in parliament but ­declined to provide the identity of family travellers in travel reports to parliament.

MP family flights to stay off the radar

Finance initially agreed with her after the FOI request, blocking the identities by claiming that a family member had a reasonable expectation of privacy, despite being paid for by the public.

But in a new ruling, Finance Department client services branch Kim Baker said it was well known that family members were allowed to travel under parliamentary entitlements.

She also noted Mr Prentice, a former Queensland state MP, was well known publicly.

Ms Baker also pointed to a ruling by the OIC involving the department in August last year in which it was declared MPs would expect to have their public expenses scrutinised.

“In light of the above, I have decided that releasing the name of Mrs Prentice’s husband is not an unreasonable disclosure of personal information,” Ms Baker said.

“As I am satisfied that the release of the name is not an unreasonable disclosure of personal information, I need not consider whether the release of the name would be contrary to the public interest.”

Mrs Prentice declined to comment.

In 2006, Mr Prentice was forced into bankruptcy over a $1.062 million bill alleged by the Australian Tax Office, later saying he disputed it but could only pay less than $100,000 because of his meagre assets .

Mr Prentice had insisted during his wife’s 2010 election campaign that voters were “voting for Jane” and he had nothing to do with her work.