Commons approves plans to exclude from parliament MPs arrested on suspicion of serious offence
MPs arrested on suspicion of a serious offence face being barred from parliament under new plans approved in a vote on Monday night.
It comes despite the government putting forward a motion that recommended MPs only face a ban if they are charged with a violent or sexual offence – a higher bar.
On Monday night, MPs voted to reverse government moves to water down the measures on “risk-based exclusions” to ensure members can be excluded from parliament at the point of arrest for serious sexual or violent offences, in line with the original recommendation from the House of Commons Commission.
The commission’s initial proposal was later revised by the government to raise the threshold for a potential ban to the point of charge.
But in a surprise move, MPs voted 170 to 169, a majority of one, in favour of an amendment by Lib Dem MP Wendy Chamberlain and Labour MP Jess Phillips to reinstate the original intention of the policy.
MPs were given a free vote on the matter, meaning they were not forced to vote along party lines.
Politics latest: Court ruling ‘blows PM’s claims about Rwanda plan out of the water’
The division list showed eight Conservative MPs voted in favour of the opposition amendment, including safeguarding minister Laura Farris, former prime minister Theresa May and backbench MP Theresa Villiers.
Ms Villiers was herself recommended for a suspension from the Commons for one day in 2021 after she and several other Conservative MPs breached the code of conduct by trying to influence a judge in the trial of former MP Charlie Elphicke, who was convicted in 2020 of sexually assaulting two women and jailed for two years.
The result means those who have been arrested on suspicion of a violent or sexual offence will be banned from parliament, pending the approval of an independent panel.
Labour MP Jess Phillips
Mike Clancy, the general secretary of the Prospect trade union, said the outcome was an “important and overdue victory for common-sense and those working on the parliamentary estate”, while FDA general secretary Dave Penman added: “Parliament is a workplace for thousands and these new formal procedures give staff the safe working environment they deserve and would expect in any other workplace.”
Ms Phillips, who advocated for the case for exclusion at the point of arrest, wrote on X: “Shit! We won the vote by one.”
In the debate preceding the vote, she told the Commons: “Today, just on this one day, I have spoken to two women who were raped by members of this parliament; that’s a fairly standard day for me.
“Exclusion at the point of charge sends a clear message to victims that not only will we not investigate unless a victim goes to the police but we won’t act unless they’re charged, which happens in less than 1% of cases. ‘So what’s the point?’ was essentially what this victim said to me.”
No hiding place for suspected Commons sex pests
In a dramatic knife-edge vote, MPs have voted that there should be no hiding place for suspected Commons sex pests.
Former prime minister Theresa May led a small group of eight Conservatives voting with Opposition MPs to defy the Commons Leader Penny Mordaunt.
To the fury of many Opposition MPs, Ms Mordaunt wanted MPs accused of serious sex or violent offences to be barred from parliament only when they’re charged.
It was officially a free vote. But the vast bulk of MPs voting to delay a ban until a charge were Conservatives, including several Cabinet ministers.
That was brave, so close to a general election. Surely those MPs who voted against a ban upon arrest will be attacked by their political opponents at the election for being soft on suspected sex pests?
The timing of the vote was perhaps unfortunate, coming amid renewed controversy earlier this week over sex pest Charlie Elphicke, the former Conservative MP who was jailed for sex offences.
At the weekend his ex-wife Natalie, who defected from the Conservatives to Labour last week, was accused of lobbying a former justice secretary, Sir Robert Buckland, on his behalf, an allegation she dismissed as “nonsense”.
And despite missing the weekly meeting of the parliamentary Labour Party earlier, Ms Elphicke duly voted with her new colleagues for a ban which would have almost certainly penalised her ex-husband had it been in force.
After the vote, leading supporters of the arrest ban were jubilant and stunned by the closeness of the vote. “Incredible!” Labour’s Stella Creasy told Sky News. Mr Rees-Mogg, however, condemned the proposal as a “power grab”.
It’s a historic vote. It doesn’t matter how close it was. Accusers will argue they’re now better protected. And MPs who supported the tougher ban argue that it brings the Commons into line with other workplaces.
Well, up to a point. MPs still have many perks and privileges that other employers and employees don’t. And Parliament still has a long way to go before its working practices and grievance procedures are brought fully up to date.
The exclusion policy was put forward following a number of incidents involving MPs in recent years and concerns about the safety of those working in parliament.
Currently, party whips decide if and when an MP accused of an offence should be prevented from attending the parliamentary estate.
Under the new plans, a risk assessment will take place when the Clerk of the House is informed by the police that an MP has been arrested on suspicion of committing a violent or sexual offence.
The risk assessment will be carried out by a risk assessment panel, appointed by Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle.
Commons leader Penny Mordaunt cited the “large” number of “vexatious” claims lodged against colleagues as a reason to require a member to be charged before exclusion.
Read more:
Ministers abandon plans to ‘criminalise’ homelessness following backlash
Health secretary unable to guarantee no further maternity care scandals following birth trauma report
Former minister Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg used the debate to describe the exclusion plans as an “extraordinary power grab by standing orders to undermine a fundamental of our constitution”, while Sir Michael Ellis, a former attorney general, said: “A person must not suffer imposition before guilt has been proven.”
The crash involving a cargo ship and oil tanker off the East Yorkshire coast is bad news for the sea, fish and air in the area. What we don’t know yet is quite how bad it will be.
That depends on a few things – but the speed of the collision, clouds of filthy black smoke from the fires and the leaked fuel are certainly worrying.
Firstly, it matters what was on board those two massive vessels.
Follow live: Jet fuel spilling into sea after tanker collision
Analytics firm Vortexa estimates the 183m-long tanker was carrying about 130,000 barrels of jet fuel (kerosene), which is now leaking into the sea.
Jet fuel is not as sticky or viscous as heavier types of oil, thankfully, so it’s less likely to clog the feathers and fur of birds and seals. It can also be broken down by natural bacteria.
But it can still poison fish and kill animals and plants on the shoreline if it makes its way into the soil there.
The Marine Conservation Society has pointed out the site in the Humber estuary is close to some protected areas and is important for seabirds and harbour porpoises.
And both ships will have been powered by a dirtier, heavier kind of oil – likely marine gas oil or heavy fuel oil, though we don’t know the details yet.
Heavy fuel oil is nasty stuff.
Pic: Bartek Smialek/PA
Cheap, thick and tar-like, it can smother animals and is very dangerous if they consume it, and is extremely difficult to clean up. Let’s hope this isn’t creeping around the North Sea already.
We don’t know how much of either the jet fuel or the oil powering the ships has leaked, or how much will be burned off in the violent fires – which themselves are ploughing black smoke and filthy air pollution into the surrounding atmosphere.
And we don’t know for sure what was on the Solong cargo ship and if, or what, will go into the sea.
Cargo ship ‘had sodium cyanide on board’
It was carrying 15 containers of sodium cyanide among other cargo, according to a report from maritime data provider Lloyd’s List Intelligence.
The container vessel was also transporting an unknown quantity of alcohol, said the casualty report – an assessment of incidents at sea – citing a message from the local coastguard.
Plastic takes hundreds of years to break down, and potentially can choke or trap animals.
Many of us have seen that uncomfortable viral video of a turtle having a straw yanked out of its nose. Previous accidents on cargo ships have seen plastic Lego pieces wash up in Cornwall 25 years later.
Read more:
How UK North Sea platforms dump gas
Secondly, the impact depends on the sea and weather conditions around it.
Things like the wind and currents affect how an oil spill spreads in the sea. Scientists can draw up computer models to simulate how the oil could behave.
Thirdly, it matters how quickly this is all tackled and then cleaned up, if necessary, and if it can be.
Usually the slower the response, the worse the impact.
The coastguard has said the incident “remains ongoing” and it has started assessing the “likely counter pollution response” that will be required.
Such a response might need the help of numerous public bodies: the government environment department, the transport department, the Environment Agency and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency.
So for now the best we can hope for – aside from the welfare of the people involved – is that not all the oil is spilled or burnt, that conditions are calm and that rescuers and those cleaning up can work swiftly.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports11 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway