Skip to main content
Site logo

Main navigation

  • Home
  • About Liam
  • News
  • Local Campaigns
  • Letters
  • Contact
Site logo

Parliamentary Standards - Owen Paterson (11/21)

  • Tweet

t is clear, in retrospect, that it was a mistake to conflate the separate issues of the specific case with the general issues around the need to reform the current process. It was right for the Minister for the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Steve Barclay, to apologise to the House, on behalf of the Government.  The whole issue has become so party-politicised that important considerations are in danger of being lost. 

Let me deal firstly with the case of Owen Paterson and the general issues it raises. The amendment, tabled by the hugely respected former Leader of the House, Andrea Leadsom, represented an issue on which she has long campaigned. This, rather than any considerations around the specific case, is why I signed the amendment. It would not have changed the judgement on Owen Paterson but might have led to an appeal process which many, including myself, believe is missing from the current system. 

On the specific case of Mr Paterson,  it is clear he wanted to call no fewer than 17 witnesses to give evidence in support of his case, and he was not afforded the opportunity to do so. 

As my colleague David Jones MP said in the Commons “I find it hard to see how the denial of a right to call witnesses and for those witnesses to be examined and cross-examined—a right that is taken for granted in civil and criminal proceedings in this country—can be compatible with natural justice. It is one thing to read written evidence, and it is another thing for that evidence to be tested in examination and cross-examination, and that was not allowed.” 

It is entirely possible that this would have made no difference to the outcome of the Committee’s decision but it seems that natural justice would have been served. 

On the more generic point, there is no provision for an independent appeals process under Standing Order No 150 of the House. I believe that provision should be made for a proper appeals procedure as there is under the Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme, where an appeal panel is chaired by a High Court judge. 

This issue of legality was dealt with by the former Attorney General, Jeremy Wright,  in the debate in the Commons. 

In pointing out the complexity of the issue, he said: ”Although I accept as a matter of democratic principle that it is necessary for Members of Parliament to authorise a sanction involving suspension or expulsion from this House, it does not follow from that that it is either necessary or desirable for Members of Parliament to judge the merits of disciplinary proceedings against other Members of Parliament. If we needed a demonstration of how that can cause problems and undermine confidence in our rules, we surely had it last week. We must have reform, but reform must be undertaken with a clear head and in a balanced way.” I entirely agree with him.  

While there is a strong case for a clear appeal procedure, it must be remembered that the Commissioner makes a recommendation, not a decision. The decision is made by the Committee on Standards, and it is that decision that would be subject to any appeal that we added to the current architecture. 

Getting a genuinely independent mechanism for this would, I believe, avoid the potential situation where MPs were seen to be “marking their own homework” when it came to appealing a decision made by the Committee. It is a great pity that serious issues that need to be addressed were lost in the parliamentary shambles of recent days. I hope we all, including the government, will learn the appropriate lessons. 

Letters

  • Big Plastic Count (5/22)
  • Bristol Airport - Reply from the Minister (5/22)
  • Energy Costs (05/22)
  • Animal Welfare Bills (4/22)
  • Availability of Cash (4/22)
  • LGBT Rights and Support (4/22)
  • Petrol Prices (4/22)
  • Processing Asylum Claims in Rwanda (4/22)
  • Portishead/Bristol Rail Link - Letter from the Minister at the Department of Transport (4/22)
  • Statement on the Prime Minister and No 10 Parties (4/22)
  • The Elections Bill and the Electoral Commission (4/22)
  • The Government's Approach to Building Safety (4/22)
  • Workforce Planning - Health and Care Bill (4/22)
  • Free Lateral Flow Tests - Care Home Visits (3/22)
  • Fur Trade and the Import of Foie Gras (3/22)
  • Lift the Ban - Asylum Seekers and Employment (3/22)
  • Online Safety Bill Petition (3/22)
  • P&O Ferries (3/22)
  • Persecution of Women and Girls (3/22)
  • The Fur Trade (3/22)
  • Animals in Science Regulation Unit (ASRU) - 3/22
  • Cladding Remediation Costs (3/22)
  • Domestic Abuse - Valerie's Law (3/22)
  • Ukraine - Sanctions (3/22)
  • Ukraine Update (3/22)
  • Ukrainian Air Space (3/22)
  • Ukrainian Refugee Crisis (03/2022)
  • Visas for Ukrainians (3/22)
  • Animal Sentience in the UK (2/22)
  • Dementia Research (2/22)
  • Energy Price Cap (2/22)
  • Expansion of Bristol Airport (2/22)
  • Fairtrade Fortnight and International Climate Finance (2/22)
  • Hate Crime and Misogony (2/22)
  • Pubs and Alcohol Duty (2/22)
  • The Hunting Act (2/22)
  • The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill (PCSC Bill) - 2/22
  • Parliamentary Standards - Owen Paterson (11/21)
  • Storm Overflows - Amendments (11/21)
  • Ambitious Environment Bill (10/21)
  • Fuel Supply Issues (10/21)
  • Food Plates Campaign (10/21)
  • Green Investment and the Spending Review  (10/21)
  • Ivory (10/21)
  • Live Animal Exports (10/21)
  • Climate Change (10/21)
  • Cambo Oil Field (9/21)
  • Dangerous Dogs (9/21)
  • Paying For Social Care (9/21)
  • Universal Credit (9/21)
  • Briefing Letter On Social Care (09/21)
  • The Building Safety Bill Second Reading (07/21)
  • Overseas Aid (06/21)
  • Reply from the Secretary of State - MHCLG (05/21)
  • NHS Pay Rise (3/21)
  • Sarah Everard Vigil (3/21)
  • Violence Against Women and Girls (3/21)
  • Coronavirus - Dementia (2/21)
  • Alcohol and Beer Duty (2/21)
  • Failand – Planning Proposals (2/21)
  • Neonicotinoids(2/21)
  • Sows – Farrowing Crates – Sir David Amess’s Bill (2/21)
  • MENCAP Campaign –  Vaccinations for People with Learning Disabilities  (1/21)
  • Vaccine Accessability for People with Sight Loss (1/21)
  • Briefing from DEFRA on the use of neonicotinoids (1/21)
  • Alcohol and Beer Duty (01/21)
  • Clap for Carers (1/21)
  • Anti-Genocide Lords Amendment (01/21)
  • Food Parcels - quality of free school meals (1/21)
  • Covid 19 - Support for Pubs (01/21)
  • Environment Bill - Nature Recovery (01/21)
  • Environment Bill - Plastics (01/21)
  • Food Trade Standards and Future Trade Deals (01/21)
  • Treatment of Animals in Laboratories (01/21)
  • Working Time Regulations (01/21)
  • Mental Health of Children and Young People - Comprehensive Spending Review (9/20)
  • Update - Covid 19 (09/20)
  • Overseas Aid (12/20)
  • Support for Pubs (11/20)
  • Fur Trade (10/20)
  • MP's Pay Rise (10/20)
  • A Green and Fair Recovery (9/20)
  • EU/International Law (09/20)
  • Protection of Birds of Prey – Grouse Moors (8/20)
  • Creativity is required to reduce exam problems (08/20)
  • Supertrawlers (7/20)
  • Trade Bill (7/20)
  • Environment Bill (7/20)
  • Regular Coronavirus Testing for NHS Staff (6/20)
  • A Democratic Planning System (6/20)
  • Proposal to Extend the Transition Period – Social Market Foundation Report (6/20)
  • HS2 (5/20)
  • Universal Basic Income (5/20)
  • Ocean Protection (3/20)
  • NHS & International Trade (3/20)
  • EU Trade Agreements (02/20)

Dr Liam Fox MP Member of Parliament for North Somerset

Footer

  • About RSS
  • Accessibility
  • Cookies
  • Privacy
  • About Liam
  • Constituency
Promoted by Jago Brockway on behalf of Liam Fox, both at 16 Northgate, Bridgwater, Somerset, TA6 3EU
Copyright 2022 Dr Liam Fox MP Member of Parliament for North Somerset. All rights reserved.
Powered by Bluetree