A previous report from the Committee on Standards and Privileges (HCP 267, Session 2000-01; ISBN 0102189013) recommended a number of changes to the rules regarding the conduct of MPs. This report by the Committee contains further proposals for reform which it is hoped will simplify and clarify the rules in line with the requirements of the Electoral Commission. Recommendations include: 1) changes to the 'advocacy rule' which prohibits MPs from lobbying in parliamentary proceedings or during their constituency business for an organisation from which the MP receives financial benefit or consideration; and 2) the minimum level for the registration of financial interests to be set at one per cent of the current MP's salary (that is £550). An annex to the report contains a revised version of the 'Code of Conduct' and 'Guide to the Rules' incorporating the Committee's recommendations, which is commended to Parliament.
In light of the fact that the Code of Conduct for MPs has remained essentially unaltered in substance since its introduction in 1996, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards has undertaken a review of the Code following a consultation exercise. The Committee's report examines the Commissioner's recommendations, and includes his memorandum to the Committee and the draft new Code as appendices. Although the Code does not need major revision, some specific changes are recommended based on experience of operating the Code over the last eight years, as well as to improve its clarity and accessibility. The Committee's report expresses agreement will all the changes to the Code recommended by the Commissioner, and proposes one further modification relating to the inclusion of an explicit commitment to equality and to uphold the general law against discrimination.
This report by the Commons Select Committee on Standards and Privileges presents their observations on the recommendations of the Committee on Standards in Public Life (also known as the Wicks Committee) published in November 2002 (Cm. 5663, ISBN 0101566328). It concluded that standards of conduct in the House of Commons were generally high but also made 27 recommendations designed to improve the system of regulation, including the role and appointment of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. The Select Committee on Standards and Privileges state their agreement with the vast majority of these recommendations, and where their opinion differs, alternative suggestions are made.
This report does not look into specific allegations of hacking, some of which are currently under investigation by the prosecuting authorities or may become the subject of judicial review. Instead it considers whether hacking of MPs' mobile phones, if it has occurred, may be a contempt of Parliament. The committee has concluded that there could potentially be a contempt if the hacking can be shown to have interfered with the work of the House or to have impeded or obstructed an MP from taking part in such work, or where a series of acts of hacking can be shown that the hacking has interfered with the work of the House by creating a climate of insecurity for one or more MPs. It is proposed that the draft Privileges Bill should include a definition of what is meant by 'contempt of Parliament' and that the Bill should codify Parliament's powers to impose sanctions, including a power for the House of Commons to fine. The committee points out that hacking is an offence under the criminal law and that civil law remedies may be available to MPs, just as they are available to others. It suggests that MPs and the House should pursue legal remedies in preference to proceeding against hackers and that only in exceptional circumstances should a hacker who has been brought before a court of law be proceeded against subsequently for contempt. In the view of the committee, there should be no special provision made to provide MPs or Parliament with remedies through the courts that are not available to others
In January 2013 three lay members became part of a new Committee on Standards. As a result of the lay members' reflections on the experience of their first year in office the Committee on Standards decided to undertake a comprehensive review of the standards system in the House of Commons. There has been a decline in public trust, not just in politics but in other institutions. The expenses scandal played a significant part in reducing public trust, and the Committee do not underestimate its impact. It still has an immense effect on how MPs' activities are seen and reported. The majority of MPs carry out their tasks without any questions raised about the propriety of their actions. The growth in constituency case work suggests that while the public may distrust MPs in general, in practice they are willing to bring individual MPs their problems. MPs have a complex and multi-faceted role, and one of the lessons of the last year has been that there is little understanding of what MPs do, the rules governing their conduct, and the ways in which those rules are enforced. This Report is intended to increase that understanding, as well as to propose improvements. This report sets out the range of functions that an MP undertakes. It describes the various aspects of MPs' work and the limitations of their role. It acknowledges MPs need the freedom to decide their priorities within a potentially infinite workload. The Committee believes self-regulation, with external input, is the appropriate system.
The Committee on Standards and Privileges published its Third Report of Session 2012-13, Proposed Revisions to the Guide to the Rules relating to the conduct of Members1 on 4 December 2012 (HC 636, ISBN 9780215050939). There have been a number of developments since that report. The most significant is the publication of the Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO) Fourth Evaluation Round Report on Corruption Prevention in respect of members of Parliament, judges and prosecutors in the UK (http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/greco/evaluations/round4/GrecoEval4(2012)2_UnitedKingdom_EN.pdf). The GRECO report positively noted that: The United Kingdom has taken important steps to strive for improvement in the prevention of corruption in all three sectors of activity subject to the present evaluation. These steps are in addition to the fact that Members of Parliament, judges and prosecutors do not have any general immunity from prosecution for criminal conduct. It made several recommendations directed at the legislative assemblies in the United Kingdom. There was close involvement in the process which meant that the Committee and the Commissioner were able to consider the GRECO recommendations in the course of revising the Guide to the Rules, even though the report itself had not yet been published. The current report presents and discusses each of the GRECO recommendations, specifically those relating the House of Commons. It also covers revisions to the seven principles of public life recently recommended by the Committee on Standards in Public Life, the penalties applicable in case of breaches of the rules, and the date on which any revised Guide should come into force.
Incorporating HC 1040-i, ii and ii, session 2008-09. About the police search on 27 November 2009 of the Parliamentary offices of Damian Green MP, who had been leaked some restricted papers by a Home Office official
This Report arises from a memorandum from the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards dealing with the conduct of Nadine Dorries in respect of the registration of fees relating to her appearance in "I'm a Celebrity ... Get Me Out of Here!", an ITV television programme. Ms Dorries contended that such payments (if any) were made to a company, Averbrook Ltd, of which she is a director, and that she was not required to register income received by the company, but only any remuneration she drew from it. Ms Dorries further contends that as she was not required to register the company's income, she did not have to respond to the Commissioner's requests for information about payments for her media work. The Committee concluded that Ms Dorries must register the details required by the rules. That leaves her initial failure to abide by the Registrar's advice, and her attitude toward the Commissioner's inquiry. It was recommended that Ms Dorries: register all payments in respect of her employment, whether or not they have been channelled through Averbrook Ltd or any other third party; and apologise to the House by way of a Personal Statement. The Committee expects Ms Dorries to consult the Registrar in person about the detail of her Register entry within 21 days of publication of this Report. They will monitor Ms Dorries's compliance and will recommend further action if necessary
Measures and policies to protect employees from bullying and harassment are a common way to ensure that employers fulfill their contractual obligations and their statutory duties to their employees: their existence does not mean that an employer has a problem. In June 2011 the House of Commons Commission agreed such a policy-the "Respect Policy"-to deal with possible bullying and harassment by Members or their staff towards House of Commons staff. That policy had two facets: an informal procedure and a more formal procedure. Although well intentioned, in practice there were at least two flaws in the formal part of the Respect Policy: investigations were undertaken by a House of Commons official, who might be considered to have an interest; and Members had no right of appeal if a complaint was upheld while staff could appeal if it was dismissed. The formal part of the procedure was therefore suspended in November 2012. In March 2014 the House of Commons Commission agreed a further draft of the revised Respect Policy and the unions considered that draft to be "a basis for an effective and proportionate policy". The Respect policy now has four stages, rather than two: stage one: internal resolution (issue raised and possible mediation), stage two: internal resolution (formal grievance meeting), stage three: Commissioner for Standards (consideration), stage four: Commissioner for Standards (investigation and possible referral to the Committee on Standards). The Committee is content for the House of Commons Commission to conclude an agreement with the unions based on the draft Respect Policy
The Committee recognises the appetite in many quarters for fundamental constitutional change and welcomes the Government's renewed focus on constitutional reform and renewal in response to this. It is surprised by the limited provisions in the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill, and fears that this may be a missed opportunity to make progress in some areas of reform. Any programme introducing fundamental change should be carefully constructed and aimed at a coherent outcome taking into account the widest possible range of views and allowing sufficient time for consideration and response. The Government's approach to constitutional reform has been ad hoc and piecemeal. Reform must underpinned by a set of constitutional principles based on a proper understanding of the position and role of Parliament in relation to the other institutions of state. The report covers the Parliamentary Standards Bill, House of Lords reform, a written constitution, stronger powers to local government, electoral reform, young people's engagement with politics, freedom of information. The Committee cautions that inappropriate handling of bills and proposals for reform specifically designed to restore public trust may further undermine that trust.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.