Connect with us

Published

on

A Conservative former minister has avoided a suspension after Tory MPs backed a government-sanctioned amendment to stop it in a Commons vote, despite anger at a decision Labour claim will inflict “enduring damage” upon parliament’s reputation.

Owen Paterson was facing a 30-day suspension from the House for breaching lobbying rules over his paid consultancy work on behalf of two companies.

But Conservative colleagues backed an amendment to the motion to suspend Mr Paterson which will instead see a new committee set up to examine the current standards system and take another look at the case against him.

Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Owen Paterson (left) and London Mayor Boris Johnson during the unveiling a life-size mock-up of the new hop-on, hop-off double-decker bus for London based on the driver-and-conductor Routemaster in Acton in west London.
Image:
Boris Johnson supported efforts to save Owen Paterson from an immediate Commons suspension

It was passed by 250 votes to 232, after Tory MPs were ordered to back it on a three-line whip.

The former environment secretary strongly denies allegations that he broke lobbying rules.

The move by Conservative MPs was supported by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

In a statement released before the vote, a Number 10 spokesman said: “This isn’t about one case but providing members of parliament from all political parties with the right to a fair hearing.

More on Conservatives

“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.”

Sky News also saw a letter from Commons leader Jacob Rees-Mogg urging Conservative MPs to support the amendment, which was tabled by senior Tory Andrea Leadsom.

Opening the debate in the Commons, Mr Rees-Mogg said concerns over the investigation into Mr Paterson had become “too numerous to ignore”.

Business Secretary Andrea Leadsom leaves Downing Street, London, after a National Security Council meeting. Pic: PA
Image:
Business Secretary Andrea Leadsom leaves Downing Street, London, after a National Security Council meeting. Pic: PA

The Commons leader claimed he came “not to defend” Mr Paterson but to “consider the process by which he has been tried”.

He added: “It is not for me to judge him, others have done that, but was the process a fair one?”

Labour hit out at the move, accusing the PM of encouraging ministers to “vote for a return to the worst of the 1990s sleaze culture”.

Shadow Commons leader Thangam Debbonaire said: “If today the amendment passes or if the motion falls entirely, it sends the message that when we don’t like the rules, we just break the rules – when someone breaks the rules, we just change the rules.”

She added: “The enduring damage that this would do to Parliament’s reputation is something that none of us should be prepared to consider.”

The issue was raised at Prime Minister’s Questions, with Mr Johnson defending the government’s stance.

“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 in this House allow for proper appeal,” he told MPs.

Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner, standing in for Sir Keir Starmer while he isolates after catching COVID, accused the PM of hypocrisy and “making it up as he goes along”.

“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,” she said.

“It is one rule for them and one rule for the rest of us.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player


‘When they break the rules, they remake them’

Referring to the case of Delyn MP Rob Roberts, who was found by an independent panel earlier this year to have sexually harassed a member of his staff, Ms Rayner said: “They can’t change the rules to stop sexual harassment, but they can change the rules to allow cash for access.”

Now that the amendment has been passed, a nine-person committee with a Conservative majority and led by Tory ex-cabinet minister John Whittingdale will review the current standards system and reconsider the case against Mr Paterson.

Following a two-year investigation, the parliamentary commissioner for standards, Kathryn Stone, said Mr Paterson had breached rules prohibiting paid advocacy by making multiple approaches to government departments and ministers for two companies.

The North Shropshire MP was found to have “repeatedly used his privileged position” to benefit Randox, a clinical diagnostics company, and Lynn’s Country Foods, a meat processor and distributor.

Mr Paterson earns more than £110,000 per year in total for his consultancy roles for the two companies.

The allegations against Mr Paterson, who was environment secretary from 2012 to 2014, relate to his conduct between October 2016 and February 2020.

A Commons committee, including four Tory MPs, supported Ms Stone’s findings and recommended Mr Paterson should be suspended from the Commons for a month.

But Mr Paterson accused Ms Stone of admitting to him she “made up her mind” before the allegations were put to him and claimed none of his 17 witnesses were interviewed.

In a lengthy statement, in which he declared he was “not guilty”, the 65-year-old also said he was raising serious issues about food contamination in his contact with officials.

And he claimed the investigation “undoubtedly played a major role” in his wife, Rose Paterson, taking her own life in June last year.

A suspension from the Commons has to be approved by MPs, hence Wednesday’s vote.

If MPs had approved the suspension, Mr Paterson would have been subject to a recall petition.

This could have seen a by-election triggered in his constituency if more than 10% of local voters signed the petition.

Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK

Continue Reading

Politics

Corruption watchdog clears Javier Milei over LIBRA crypto scandal

Published

on

By

Corruption watchdog clears Javier Milei over LIBRA crypto scandal

Corruption watchdog clears Javier Milei over LIBRA crypto scandal

Argentina’s corruption watchdog has cleared President Javier Milei of wrongdoing over the LIBRA scandal, saying the post was made while acting in a personal capacity.

Continue Reading

Politics

Gaming data is the next AI battleground

Published

on

By

Gaming data is the next AI battleground

Gaming data is the next AI battleground

Gaming’s behavioral data is rapidly becoming the most sought-after resource in AI. Game telemetry fuels next-gen AI agents for everything from logistics to finance. The battle for gaming data is on.

Continue Reading

Politics

Rachel Reeves turning around UK’s finances ‘like Steve Jobs did for Apple’, claims minister

Published

on

By

Rachel Reeves turning around UK's finances 'like Steve Jobs did for Apple', claims minister

Rachel Reeves will turn around the economy the way Steve Jobs turned around Apple, a cabinet minister has suggested ahead of the upcoming spending review.

Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle compared the chancellor to the late Apple co-founder when asked on Sky News’ Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips where the £86bn for his department is coming from.

Politics Live: Winter fuel payment cut to be dealt with ‘in run up to autumn’

Steve Jobs. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Apple Inc. chief executive Steve Jobs, who died in 2011. Pic: Reuters

Rachel Reeves
Image:
Chancellor Rachel Reeves


The package, confirmed ahead of the full spending review next week, will see each region in England granted £500m to spend on science projects of their choice, including research into faster drug treatments.

Asked by Trevor Phillips how the government is finding the money, Mr Kyle said: “Rachel raised money in taxes in the autumn, we are now allocating it per department.

“But the key thing is we are going to be investing record amounts of money into the innovations of the future.

“Just bear in mind that how Apple turned itself around when Steve Jobs came back to Apple, they were 90 days from insolvency. That’s the kind of situation that we had when we came into office.

“Steve Jobs turned it around by inventing the iMac, moving to a series of products like the iPod.

“Now we are starting to invest in the vaccine processes of the future, some of the high-tech solutions that are going to be high growth. We’re investing in our space sector… they will create jobs in the future.”

👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈

The spending review is a process used by governments to set departmental budgets for the years ahead.

Asked if it will include more detail on who will receive winter fuel payments, Mr Kyle said that issue will be “dealt with in the run-up to the autumn”.

“This is a spending review that’s going to set the overall spending constraints for government for the next period, the next three years, so you’re sort of talking about two separate issues at the moment,” he said.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘So we won’t get an answer on winter fuel this week?

Scrapping universal winter fuel payments was one of the first things Labour did in government – despite it not being in their manifesto – with minsters saying it was necessary because of the financial “blackhole” left behind by the Tories.

But following a long-drawn out backlash, Sir Keir Starmer said last month that the government would extend eligibility, which is now limited to those on pension credit.

Read more: Spending review 2025 look ahead

It is not clear what the new criteria will be, though Ms Reeves has said the changes will come into place before this winter.

Mr Kyle also claimed the spending review will see the government invest “the most we’ve ever spent per pupil in our school system”.

However, he said the chancellor will stick to her self-imposed fiscal rules – which rule out borrowing for day-to-day spending – meaning that while some departments will get extra money, others are likely to face cuts.

Continue Reading

Trending