The head of the most senior ethics watchdog has called for some form of limit on MPs’ second jobs, telling Sky News it is “hard to argue” some politicians are putting parliament first.
MPs should be given an “indicative” ceiling on how much time to spend on their extra-parliamentary roles, according to an interview with the chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, Lord Evans.
The crossbench peer, who spent his career in the secret service and was head of MI5 for six years, today praises the “valuable” work by Sky News in the Westminster Accounts project which has spent the last seven months examining the role of money in politics. He today uses a major interview to push for change.
In a rare wide-ranging interview, Lord Evans also:
• Criticised the attempt by Boris Johnson’s government to change the standards system in response to the Owen Paterson affair as “not the right way to behave. That can’t be the right way to behave in public office.”
• Said there were “very disgraceful” episodes over the last three years involving breaches of parliamentary standards.
• Pressed on Mr Johnson’s leadership, he said: “The tone from the top, the leadership is very important…. The way that leaders behave will set a tone that others will follow.”
More on Westminster Accounts
Related Topics:
• Said it was still too hard to identify the ultimate donor of money in British politics, the system isn’t transparent enough and “there are still risks of foreign money coming into the political process here”.
Lord Evans says that Sky’s Westminster Accounts project highlights how there remains a problem with some MPs and the amount of time they spend on second jobs.
Advertisement
“There have been some quite well-documented cases where it’s hard to argue that this person is putting their main focus on their parliamentary duties, given the amount of time that they appear to be giving to other activities.”
Lord Evans, who steps down after his five-year term expires in the autumn, says it is for parliament, not his committee to set precise rules, and concedes this exercise is “difficult”. Nevertheless, in his interview he says MPs should try again to achieve this.
“We’ve suggested that one might want to give indicative figures in terms of hours. So far, the parliamentary authorities have not decided to go down that route, but we think there are attractions in that.”
The former prime minister Boris Johnson proposed a fixed limit to second jobs in the wake of the lobbying scandal involving former Tory MP Owen Paterson, but later abandoned the plans in the face of a Tory backbench revolt.
Image: Lord Evans declined to criticise Boris Johnson by name but made clear his unhappiness with how the ex-PM behaved at key moments
In this parliament, from December 2019 until he stood down in June, Mr Johnson earned £5.1m, more than any other MP.
Theresa May, another former PM, has earned £2.7m, the Westminster Accounts tool produced by Sky News together with media company Tortoise shows.
The Committee on Standards in Public Life does not investigate individuals and instead makes suggestions on how to change the rules directly to the prime minister, so Lord Evans would not comment on individual cases.
Asked he if was disappointed the most high-profile figures – ex-PMs – also earn the most outside the Commons, he replied: “I think the critical thing is it needs to be clear to the public and particularly to people’s constituents that the priority afforded by MPs, whether they’re well known or whether they’re less known, is on the interests of their constituents and of serving in parliament and not focusing on their own economic or other career interests.”
Lord Evans also issued a stark warning on the failure of the government and parliament to pass stricter rules on donations.
In stark criticism of successive Tory administrations – including that of Rishi Sunak – Lord Evans said: “One of the principles of public life is openness, and I don’t think there is enough information about where money is coming from.
“I don’t think it’s easy to identify who is giving money. I think there are still risks of foreign money coming into the political process here.”
Lord Evans continued: “We made a number of recommendations on this. The government has not accepted those. We think that’s a mistake.
“We have been assured and this has been said repeatedly by the government, that the rules are strict and rigorous. That’s not our view. The rules are not strict. They are not rigorous and they are insufficiently transparent.”
He suggested that companies can be used to disguise the source of foreign donations, which are illegal under the UK political system.
“The .. first problem is lack of real openness. And just to say ‘I have been given money by company X’, when you can’t work out where company X got that money from (and) who actually controls that company, is really not a satisfactory way of discharging responsibility for openness.
“And it’s also very important that we can protect the political system from an improper influence, whether that’s from business interests, whether that’s from extreme political interests, or whether that’s from foreign powers. And transparency is a really important part of that. And the transparency rules at the moment, in our view, the view of my committee are not strong enough.”
Lord Evans declined to criticise Mr Johnson by name but made clear his unhappiness with the way the former prime minister behaved at key moments.
Lord Evans singled out for criticism the Owen Paterson affair, highlighting “someone who was clearly breaching the parliamentary rules (who) went through due process and there was an attempt to change the rules in the middle of the process. That’s not the right way to behave. That can’t be the right way to behave in public office”.
Asked about the lord’s comments, Housing Secretary Michael Gove told Sky News: “Lord Evans is always a helpful commentator on these issues, given his position in charge of the Committee on Standards in Public Life.
“But I do think that we have a fair, transparent and effective system at the moment.”
No criminal charges will be brought over the death of an ice hockey player who died during a match in Sheffield, prosecutors have announced.
Nottingham Panthers’ Adam Johnson died in October 2023 after his neck was cut by an opposition player’s skate during a match at Sheffield’s Utilita Arena.
The Sheffield Steelers player, Matthew Petgrave, was arrested on suspicion of manslaughter and later bailed – but the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has now said it will not bring criminal charges against the Canadian.
Michael Quinn, deputy chief crown prosecutor, said: “This was a shocking and deeply upsetting incident. The CPS and South Yorkshire Police have worked closely together to determine whether any criminal charges should be brought against the other ice hockey player involved.
“Following a thorough police investigation and a comprehensive review of all the evidence by the CPS, we have concluded that there is not a realistic prospect of conviction for any criminal offence and so there will not be a prosecution.
“Our thoughts remain with the family and friends of Adam Johnson.”
Image: Tributes were left outside the Motorpoint Arena in Nottingham following the ice hockey player’s death. Pic PA
Before joining Nottingham Panthers, the Minnesota-born Johnson played in Pennsylvania for the Pittsburgh Penguins, and Sweden for the Malmo Redhawks.
He also played in California for Ontario Reign and in Germany for Augsburger Panther.
A post-mortem examination confirmed the 29-year-old died as a result of the fatal neck injury.
The crowd of 8,000 spectators watched in horror as desperate attempts were made to save his life as he lay on the ice, shielded by fellow players.
The game was abandoned and spectators were asked to leave in the aftermath.
Image: Pic PA
Kari Johnson, Johnson’s aunt, was watching the match via a livestream with his father and grandmother when he was fatally injured.
Speaking to Sky News at the time, Ms Johnson said: “It was a mess, it was a nightmare, it was like it wasn’t real. We were in shock, we couldn’t believe this was happening.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:21
Kari Johnson said her nephew was ‘a kind soul’
Ms Johnson described her nephew as a “kind soul” and a “private kid” who “never would have wanted to be in the limelight like this”.
He simply wanted to be “good at hockey and have fun”, she said, adding he was “having the time of his life in the UK” and was planning to get engaged to his girlfriend.
In January 2024, Sheffield’s senior coroner, Tanyka Rawden, suspended her investigation while the police inquiry took its course.
It later emerged that Ms Rawden had issued a Prevention of Future Deaths Report to Ice Hockey UK and the English Ice Hockey Association (EIHA) about the use of neck guards in the sport.
In the report, Ms Rawden said she was “sufficiently concerned that deaths may occur in the future if neck guards or protectors are not worn”, with the bodies given 56 days to say what action had been taken – or why action had not been taken.
Neck guards have been mandatory in the Elite League (EIHL), in which the Nottingham Panthers and Sheffield Steelers compete, since January 2024.
This followed the International Ice Hockey Federation’s decision in December to mandate the use of neck laceration protectors for its competitions.
Court decisions where people were granted asylum after arguing they had a “right to family life” will be reviewed as the government plans to ban migrants convicted of sex offences, the home secretary has said.
Foreign nationals who are added to the sex offenders register will forfeit their rights to protection under the Refugee Convention, the Home Office announced.
As part of the 1951 UN treaty, countries are allowed to refuse asylum to terrorists, war criminals and individuals convicted of a “particularly serious crime” – which is currently defined in UK law as an offence carrying a sentence of 12 months or more.
The government now plans to extend that definition to include all individuals added to the Sex Offenders’ Register, regardless of the length of sentence, in an amendment to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, which is currently going through parliament.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper told Sky News the new definition would also “take into account” sexual offence convictions in another country.
However, she was less clear if those affected will still be able to appeal against their removal from the UK under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
More from Politics
Image: More than 10,000 people have now been detected crossing the Channel. Pic: PA
She said: “We continue to comply with international law, but the whole point is that our laws and our frameworks are about how we interpret international law… and how we make sure that the courts are then making their decisions based on the UK law that parliament has passed.”
She added the government is “reviewing” a “series of decisions” made in the courts where criminals have been allowed to stay in the UK under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, which protects the right to respect “your private life, your family life, your home and your correspondence”.
“We are reviewing that because we do believe that the way in which it’s being interpreted in the courts is an issue and actually, there is greater clarification we can provide through our law to address that,” she said.
It is unclear how many asylum seekers will be affected by the change in law, as the government has been unable to provide any projections or past data on the number of asylum seekers added to the Sex Offenders’ Register.
Ms Cooper earlier said: “Sex offenders who pose a risk to the community should not be allowed to benefit from refugee protections in the UK. We are strengthening the law to ensure these appalling crimes are taken seriously.”
Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls Minister Jess Philips said: “We are determined to achieve our mission of halving violence against women and girls in a decade.
“That’s exactly why we are taking action to ensure there are robust safeguards across the system, including by clamping down on foreign criminals who commit heinous crimes like sex offences.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:18
Has Labour tackled migration?
The Home Office would like voters to see this as a substantial change. But that’s hard to demonstrate without providing any indication of the scale of the problem it seeks to solve.
Clearly, the government does not want to fan the flames of resentment towards asylum seekers by implying large numbers have been committing sex crimes.
But amid rising voter frustration about the government’s grip on the issue, and under pressure from Reform – this measure is about signalling it is prepared to take tough action.
Conservatives: ‘Too little, too late’
The Conservatives claim Labour are engaged in “pre-election posturing”.
Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said: “This is too little, too late from a Labour government that has scrapped our deterrent and overseen the worst year ever for small boat crossings – with a record 10,000 people crossing this year already.
“Foreign criminals pose a danger to British citizens and must be removed, but so often this is frustrated by spurious legal claims based on human rights claims, not asylum claims.”
The Home Office has also announced plans to introduce a 24-week target for appeal hearings (known as “first-tier tribunals”) to be held for rejected asylum seekers living in taxpayer-supported accommodation, or for foreign national offenders.
The current average wait is 50 weeks.
The idea is to cut the asylum backlog and save taxpayers money – Labour have committed to end the use of asylum hotels by the end of this parliament.
It’s unclear how exactly this will be achieved, although a number of additional court days have already been announced.
The government also plans to crack down on fake immigration lawyers who advise migrants on how to lodge fraudulent asylum claims, with the Immigration Advice Authority given new powers to issue fines of up to £15,000.