Boris Johnson is to push ahead with plans to shake up the rules for MPs who are accused of wrongdoing, despite the resignation of Owen Paterson.
Under the plans MPs found guilty of misconduct would have the right to challenge the decision before an expert panel including a High Court judge before any sanctions could be imposed.
Despite Labour’s opposition to the plan yesterday the party is likely to co-operate to bring in the new system.
Last night Tory sources claimed that Labour had been sounded out about participating in the new form of standards committee before Wednesday’s vote. They said that through the “usual channels” of the whips’ offices the party had indicated that even though it would vote against the government amendment, it would not boycott the committee that was due to consider the arrangements.
Labour sources denied that they had given any assurances that they would participate. When the scale of anger over the move became apparent they announced that they would boycott it — in effect killing it.
Advertisement
“The government would never have put forward the amendment if they didn’t have the tacit support of the opposition that they would go along with the process even if they lost the vote,” one senior Tory said. “But these things happen. That’s politics — and they sensed an opportunity.”
They added: “The inherent unfairness of the current system is something they are concerned about as well. All sides want to do something about it.”
In the Commons yesterday Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leader of the House, confirmed that the changes would not be retrospective, and so include the Paterson case, but said there was still a pressing need for reform.
“We need to ensure that we have standards in this place that are fair and robust, and that are seen to be fair and robust,” he said.
“I would highlight the independent complaints and grievance scheme, which has an appeal body, the independent expert panel. [This] has on it a High Court judge — somebody of the highest standing and legal training — but that is not the case for standards cases.”
Advertisement
He added: “I absolutely recognise that it is important to proceed on a cross-party basis to have the highest standards in this House, but ones that, when implemented, are fair to those they are applied to. That is what we will seek to achieve.” Rees-Mogg said that it would be “idle to pretend” that there were not many MPs who felt that “not having a proper appeals process is a flaw in the system”.
He said: “Of course, to maintain high standards and proper processes, we want to have cross-party support.”
Thangam Debbonaire, the shadow leader of the House, said she would “look with interest” at the government’s proposals but suggested that the party wanted the review to be carried out by the standards committee.
“We will not participate in a parallel process when the chair of the committee on standards [Chris Bryant] is doing such a great job with the other cross-party members of the committee and its lay members,” she said.
Before the government U-turn Lord Evans of Weardale, chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, said that the proposals to overhaul the disciplinary process for MPs on Wednesday had been “deeply at odds with the best traditions of British democracy”.
Advertisement
He added: “It cannot be right to propose an overhaul of the entire regulatory system in order to postpone or prevent sanctions in a very serious case of paid lobbying by an MP.
“And it cannot be right to propose that the standards system in the House of Commons should be reviewed by a select committee chaired by a member of the ruling party and with a majority of members from that same party.
“This extraordinary proposal is deeply at odds with the best traditions of British democracy. The political system in this country does not belong to one party or even to one government, it is a common good that we have all inherited from our forebears and that we all have a responsibility to preserve and to improve.”
He went on to suggest that Johnson and others may have fallen foul of the Nolan principles on public life, which are contained within the ministerial code. “The seven principles of public life that all governments have espoused for over 25 years require that ministers and MPs should show leadership in upholding ethical standards in public life,” he said. “I find it hard to see how [Wednesday’s] actions in any way meet that test.”
Yesterday Sir Keir Starmer called on Johnson to apologise to the nation for a “grubby attempt to cover up for the misdemeanour of his friend” after an “unbelievable 24 hours” that the Labour leader said had been chaotic even by the government’s standards.
