Allies of Owen Paterson defend plan to overhaul standards watchdog
Boris Johnson defies accusations he is creating ‘one rule for them and one rule for the rest of us’ at PMQs and backs attempt to BLOCK MP Owen Paterson’s suspension over lobbying scandal and axe ‘anti-Brexiteer’ standards watchdog
Ex-Cabinet minister Owen Paterson facing 30-day suspension from Parliament A standards probe found he had breached House of Commons rules on lobbying Mr Paterson blasted way the probe was conducted and denies any wrongdoingHis allies want to block the suspension and overhaul the standards watchdogMPs will vote on Mr Paterson’s fate in Commons this afternoon amid major row
<!–
<!–
<!–<!–
<!–
(function (src, d, tag){
var s = d.createElement(tag), prev = d.getElementsByTagName(tag)[0];
s.src = src;
prev.parentNode.insertBefore(s, prev);
}(“https://www.dailymail.co.uk/static/gunther/1.17.0/async_bundle–.js”, document, “script”));
<!–
DM.loadCSS(“https://www.dailymail.co.uk/static/gunther/gunther-2159/video_bundle–.css”);
<!–
Boris Johnson has signalled he will support a Tory plan to block the suspension of Owen Paterson from the House of Commons and overhaul the disciplinary process for MPs amid a furious backlash from Labour.
Mr Paterson, the Tory MP for North Shropshire, was found to have committed an ‘egregious’ breach of standards rules as he lobbied for two companies paying him more than £100,000 per year.
The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards Kathryn Stone conducted an investigation and the Committee on Standards then recommended Mr Paterson be banned from the Commons for six weeks, which represents 30 sitting days.
A vote on that recommendation is due to take place this afternoon, but allies of Mr Paterson have brought forward an amendment which would block the suspension and see his case reviewed.
The amendment, tabled by ex-Cabinet minister Andrea Leadsom, would also establish a new committee with a Tory majority which would make recommendations for a major overhaul of the current standards system.
Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner grilled Mr Johnson at Prime Minister’s Questions on whether he will support the amendment and he signalled that he will.
Mr Johnson questioned whether Mr Paterson had the ‘opportunity to make representations’ during the investigation as the premier backed calls for reform of the system.
Ms Rayner hit back and said that blocking the suspension of the former minister would show it is ‘one rule for them and one rule for the rest of us’.
Mr Paterson has angrily disputed the findings of the standards report, claiming the investigation was unfairly conducted.
The showdown vote on the Leadsom amendment will go ahead after Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons Speaker, formally selected it for a division.
Tory MPs are reportedly being instructed by Government whips to vote for the amendment but there is thought to be considerable opposition to the move from some backbenchers who are concerned about the way it could look to voters.
Downing Street said in a statement issued this morning that the standards process needs to change as Number 10 insisted ‘this isn’t about one case’.
Should the amendment pass it could prompt the resignation of Ms Stone who some Tory critics accuse of being biased against Conservative MPs and Brexiteers.
Allies of Mr Paterson admitted the plan to overhaul the standards watchdog after it recommended the former minister be suspended ‘looks terrible’.
But they insisted there is ‘no alternative’ because the current ‘hopeless’ system ‘doesn’t respect natural justice’.
Sir Bernard Jenkin, a friend of Mr Paterson, said there has been a ‘bad system for years and years and years’ and the crunch vote in the Commons today is an ‘opportunity to fix it’.
Owen Paterson was found to have committed an ‘egregious’ breach of standards rules as he lobbied for two companies paying him more than £100,000 per year. Mr Paterson, pictured with his late wife Rose, claimed the ‘biased’ way the standards inquiry was carried out was a major factor in her suicide last year
Former business secretary Andrea Leadsom has tabled a parliamentary amendment that would see Mr Paterson’s potential suspension paused pending a review
The row over this afternoon’s vote dominated PMQs as Ms Rayner, who was standing in for Sir Keir Starmer who is still in Covid self-isolation, accused the Tories of ‘wallowing in sleaze’.
Labour’s deputy leader grilled Mr Johnson on whether he is going to support the Leadsom amendment.
The PM replied: ‘Paid lobbying, paid advocacy in this House is wrong and let me make absolutely no bones about that and members who are found guilty of that should apologise and pay the necessary penalties.
‘But that is not the issue in this case or this vote that is before us today. It is not.
‘The issue in this case which involved a serious family tragedy is whether a member of this House had a fair opportunity to make representations in this case and whether as a matter of natural justice our procedures allow for proper appeal.
‘That I think is something that should be of interest to members across this House and should be approached properly in a spirit of moderation and compassion.’
Ms Rayner hit back and said: ‘Let me put this to him simply. If it was a police officer, a teacher, a doctor, we would expect the independent process to be followed and not changed after the verdict.
‘It is one rule for them and one rule for the rest of us.’
Ms Rayner said of the Tories that ‘when they break the rules, they just remake the rules’.
Earlier, Sir Bernard had told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that there are ‘long standing problems’ with the standards system as he defended the move to reform it.
He admitted the circumstances mean it ‘looks terrible’ but he insisted there is ‘no alternative’.
He said: ‘This looks terrible. We have had a bad system for years and years and years. I just see this as an opportunity to fix it.
‘We are not letting Owen Paterson off. We are not exonerating him. We are not condemning him.
‘We are going to put his case in front of a proper judicial style panel where there can be proper hearing and proper cross-examination of witnesses and natural justice.
‘Our present process doesn’t respect natural justice. No where else in business would that be allowed.’
Sir Bernard said the current process is ‘very unsatisfactory’ because it requires the House of Commons as a whole to ‘give a final opinion on whether this case has been handled properly’.
He added: ‘That is a hopeless system. It looks terrible. I don’t want to be here. But there is no alternative because that is the system we have got.’
Asked if he expects the Government to back the amendment to reform the system, he said that ‘nothing has been decided’.
The Leadsom amendment would see the creation of a new committee that would examine – among other issues – whether the case against Mr Paterson should be reviewed.
Downing Street signalled its support for the amendment as it said in a statement that the current standards system should be reformed.
A Number 10 spokesman said: ‘It is essential that all in Parliament uphold the highest standards in public life. There must be tough and robust checks against lobbying for profit. There must be a proper process to scrutinise and – if necessary – discipline those who do not follow the rules.
‘As in any normal workplace and all walks of life, people should be entitled to the right to appeal. This is sacrosanct in providing fairness and natural justice, and ensuring there is an opportunity to check due process and that the right procedures were followed.
‘This isn’t about one case but providing Members of Parliament from all political parties with the right to a fair hearing.
‘Therefore the Commons should seek cross-party agreement on a new appeals process whereby the conclusions of the standards committee and the Commissioner can be looked at. This could include judicial and lay member representation on the appeals panel.’
Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner said the Tory move showed it is ‘one rule for them and one rule for the rest of us’
Should the amendment pass it could prompt the resignation of Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards Kathryn Stone who some Tory critics accuse of being biased against Conservative MPs and Brexiteers
A separate amendment proposed by Tory Julian Lewis said no further action should be taken ‘on compassionate grounds’ and this had been supported by fellow Conservatives William Wragg and Peter Bone, with a total of 13 MPs backing it as of last night.
Mr Paterson has said the manner in which the investigation was carried out had ‘undoubtedly’ played a ‘major role’ in the decision of his wife Rose to take her own life last year.
The Commons Speaker is understood to have not selected the Lewis amendment.
Commons Leader Jacob Rees-Mogg yesterday expressed sympathy for the MP’s claim that the commissioner did not speak to 17 witnesses who came forward to support him, describing that decision as ‘interesting’.
Mr Rees-Mogg told his ConservativeHome podcast: ‘It is always very important that systems appear to be fair, and therefore if somebody has witnesses, it would normally appear to be fair that those witnesses should be heard.
‘The commissioner in her report that was adopted… said the witnesses weren’t needed because their evidence they gave wasn’t relevant to the inquiry.
‘And that is an interesting view to come to, because other people might say: ‘How do you know whether it was relevant to the inquiry until you’ve taken their evidence and have found out the precise context of how things were done?’
As part of Dame Andrea’s proposals, MPs on a Conservative-majority committee led by former culture secretary John Whittingdale would examine whether the standards system should mirror that of investigations of misconduct in other workplaces, including the right of representation, the examination of witnesses, and the right of appeal.
The committee would comprise of Mr Whittingdale and eight other MPs – four Tories, three Labour and one SNP. Mr Whittingdale would have the casting vote in the event of a tie.
The Leadsom amendment will be opposed by Labour, with the party warning against trying to overhaul the system.
Thangam Debbonaire, shadow Commons leader, said: ‘Let’s not forget that the cross-party standards committee, including three Tory MPs, endorsed the commissioner’s 30-day sanction for a breach of the rule around paid advocacy.’
She said that ‘the Tories want to jettison the system that has served us well and which has been a vital part of rebuilding public trust after the dark days of Tory sleaze this Government seems determined to return to’.
Mr Rees-Mogg said there was ‘precedence’ for amending a motion to suspend an MP, saying it was last done in 1947.
Sir Lindsay Hoyle fears MPs will bring the House of Commons into disrepute if they block the 30-day suspension
Sir Lindsay’s spokeswoman did not deny a report in The Times that suggested he believes blocking the suspension would bring the House into disrepute.
Ms Stone’s investigation found Mr Paterson repeatedly lobbied on behalf of two companies for which he was acting as a paid consultant – Randox and Lynn’s Country Foods.
But the MP struck back, saying the investigation finding he breached rules on paid advocacy by MPs was a ‘biased process and not fair’.
Committee on Standards chairman Chris Bryant urged MPs to ‘read the report in full, with a fair and open mind’ and warned against voting it down in what would be an unprecedented move in the committee’s roughly 36-year history.
