UK MPs to Debate Standards Reform as BoJo’s Gov’t Faces Backlash Over Paterson ‘Sleaze’ Row
05:38 GMT 08.11.2021 (Updated: 15:16 GMT 28.05.2023)
© REUTERS / JESSICA TAYLOR
Subscribe
Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Tory ministers have been under fire after an attempt to rip up the Commons disciplinary process and prevent the 30-day suspension imposed by the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner on Conservative lawmaker Owen Paterson, who had been found guilty of breaking Commons lobbying rules.
UK MPs are holding an emergency debate on the House of Commons standards system on Monday as the government of Prime Minister Boris Johnson reels over the fallout from the Owen Paterson "sleaze" row.
The attempt by Johnson to tear up Parliament rules and overhaul the standards system for MPs rather than allow the suspension of Conservative lawmaker Owen Paterson, found guilty of paid advocacy on behalf of two companies, has resulted in his government being slammed as “politically corrupt”.
Liberal Democrat chief whip Wendy Chamberlain made an application for the emergency debate on “the consequences of the decision of the House on 3 November relating to standards” on 4 November 2021.
“We need to make sure those with a vested interest in tearing up Parliament’s anti-sleaze rules don’t have the power to do so. Last week’s events were just the latest example of political cronyism and corruption, from dodgy Covid contracts to Boris Johnson’s holidays secretly paid for by his wealthy donor friends. Time and again, Government ministers have refused to properly investigate allegations of sleaze, failed to declare relevant meetings and donations, and tried to rig the system to cover their own backs,” said Chamberlain.
She added that, “people around the country who play by the rules are being let down by Boris Johnson's Conservatives, who think the rules just don't apply to them.”
The Liberal Democrats are also proposing that MPs under investigation for breaching parliamentary rules be barred from taking part in House of Commons votes on disciplinary issues.
‘Sleaze Row’
Former Conservative MP Owen Paterson had been facing a 30-day suspension over an “egregious case of paid advocacy” after Kathryn Stone, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, last week recommended the ban in a report approved by a group of cross-party MPs on the standards committee. The former MP for North Shropshire was found to have repeatedly lobbied on behalf of two companies - Randox and Lynn’s Country Foods – which paid him more than £100,000 annually.
However, Boris Johnson's government chose not to endorse the standards watchdog's call for punishment and turn the spotlight onto the standards process itself. It backed the creation of a Tory-led committee to review the Paterson case, while overhauling the Commons standards system. If Paterson had been suspended, this could have resulted in recall proceedings that may have triggered a by-election.
An amendment superseding an originally planned yes-no vote on Paterson’s suspension was put forward by Dame Andrea Leadsom on 3 November, suggesting a new select committee which would examine the parliamentary standards system and recommend whether to review Paterson’s case. The House voted 250 to 232, majority 18, to approve the amendment. Paterson himself had hailed it as a chance to clear his name after "two years of hell".
FILE PHOTO: Owen Paterson is pictured outside the Cabinet Office in London
© REUTERS / HANNAH MCKAY / FILE PHOTO: Owen Paterson is pictured outside the Cabinet Office in London
However, a slew of anti-corruption campaigners, political observers and opposition MPs accused the Tories of "wallowing in sleaze". Furthermore, the government was accused of trying to “bully” the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner after Business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng suggested Kathryn Stone should “consider her position”.
It is appalling that a public servant who works to root out corruption in our politics is facing abuae.@KwasiKwarteng must be investigated for bullying and threatening a public servant in the media and we must all support the Commissioner's vital work.https://t.co/17UQTQgPf8
— Angela Rayner (@AngelaRayner) November 7, 2021
The set-up of a new oversight committee, to be led by former Tory minister John Whittingdale, which the amendment approved, was denounced by Labour, the SNP and Liberal Democrats, who all vowed to boycott it and thus deprive it of any cross-party authority. Hit with an angry backlash, the Government performed a U-turn the following day, scrapping the proposed reforms.
After Downing Street indicated on Thursday that Paterson would have to face a fresh vote on the 30-day suspension, The former MP announced he would resign to leave “the cruel world of politics”.
My statement today: pic.twitter.com/gZocV3WIwS
— Owen Paterson (@OwenPaterson) November 4, 2021
‘Corrupt, Contemptible’ Behaviour
Fallout from the “sleaze” row has resulted in Boris Johnson’s government facing a relentless barrage of criticism from the Opposition. Labour Party leader Sir Keir Starmer demanded that Johnson apologise to the nation over the Owen Paterson sleaze row ahead of the emergency Commons debate.
It's not a mistake.
— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) November 7, 2021
It's corrupt, it's contemptible and it's not a one-off.#Marr pic.twitter.com/wVYol5qrCz
“The prime minister is trashing the reputation of our democracy and our country. It is a pattern of behaviour from a prime minister who doesn’t know to uphold standards in public life,” Starmer was quoted by the BBC as saying on Sunday.
Appearing on the Andrew Marr Show, Starmer claimed Downing Street’s attempts to clear Paterson despite being found to have breached lobbying rules was “corruption”.
“Instead of upholding standards, he ordered his MPs to protect his mate and rip up the whole system – that is corrupt, it is contemptible and it’s not a one-off,” said Starmer.
UK Environment Secretary George Eustice attempted to dismiss the sleaze scandal as a mere “storm in a teacup”, while acknowledged that Boris Johnson’s government had “made a mistake”.
“What we have seen is a Westminster storm in a teacup. Yes, we made a mistake in bringing that forward in the way that we did, so we withdrew it. But the overall principle, that you should have due process and a right of appeal in these types of situations, I don’t think anybody doubts,” he was quoted by Sky News as saying.
