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.
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.
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.
Image: 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.”
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.
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.
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.”
An alleged attack by the Manchester Arena bomb plotter on prison officers at a high-security jail “will stick with” those impacted “for the rest of their lives”, a former officer and colleague of the victims has said.
He was serving his sentence in a separation unit, known as a “jail within a jail”, after being found guilty of 22 counts of murder for helping his brother Salman Abedi carry out a suicide bombing at an Ariana Grande concert in 2017.
The attack has raised fresh questions about the safety of prison staff.
Inmates inside separation units had access to cooking facilities, which has now been suspended.
Image: Abedi was moved back to Belmarsh after the alleged attack
‘It will stick with them for life’
Matthew, who only wants to be referred to by his first name, worked with the officers who were hospitalised following the attack.
“I’ve spoken to ex-colleagues who I’m still friends with,” he told Sky News.
“They’ve not discussed the specifics of the incident, but they’ve said it will stick with them for the rest of their lives.”
Matthew broke down as he described the “obscene” and “ludicrous” levels of violence that staff face inside prison.
He’s worked at a number of different jails.
“I’ve been there when you’re mopping your colleagues’ blood… when you’ve seen a serious assault, and you don’t know if they’re gonna be OK, and then 10 minutes later, you’ve got to get back on with your day, you’ve got to carry on running the regime,” he said.
“It is difficult, and it is awful.”
Image: Matthew worked with the officers who were hospitalised
‘No adequate protection’
There were 10,496 assaults against prison staff in England and Wales in the 12 months to September – a 19% rise on the previous year.
“The reality is there’s no adequate protections for prison staff, and that’s a great frustration,” the general secretary of the Prison Officers’ Association union, Steve Gillan, told Sky News.
Having visited HMP Frankland earlier in the week, and spoken to many of the officers who were involved, Mr Gillan described the mood among colleagues as one of “anger, frustration, and sadness”.
The association, which represents prison officers, is calling for a “reset” – and for staff to be given stab-proof vests and tasers in “certain circumstances”.
Unwary travellers returning from the EU risk having their sandwiches and local delicacies, such as cheese, confiscated as they enter the UK.
The luggage in which they are carrying their goodies may also be seized and destroyed – and if Border Force catch them trying to smuggle meat or dairy products without a declaration, they could face criminal charges.
This may or may not be bureaucratic over-reaction.
It’s certainly just another of the barriers EU and UK authorities are busily throwing up between each other and their citizens – at a time when political leaders keep saying the two sides should be drawing together in the face of Donald Trump’s attacks on European trade and security.
Image: Keir Starmer’s been embarking on a reset with European leaders. Pic: Reuters
The ban on bringing back “cattle, sheep, goat, and pig meat, as well as dairy products, from EU countries into Great Britain for personal use” is meant “to protect the health of British livestock, the security of farmers, and the UK’s food security.”
There are bitter memories of previous outbreaks of foot and mouth disease in this country, in 1967 and 2001.
In 2001, there were more than 2,000 confirmed cases of infection resulting in six million sheep and cattle being destroyed. Footpaths were closed across the nation and the general election had to be delayed.
In the EU this year, there have been five cases confirmed in Slovakia and four in Hungary. There was a single outbreak in Germany in January, though Defra, the UK agriculture department, says that’s “no longer significant”.
Image: Authorities carry disinfectant near a farm in Dunakiliti, Hungary. Pic: Reuters
Better safe than sorry?
None of the cases of infection are in the three most popular countries for UK visitors – Spain, France, and Italy – now joining the ban. Places from which travellers are most likely to bring back a bit of cheese, salami, or chorizo.
Could the government be putting on a show to farmers that it’s on their side at the price of the public’s inconvenience, when its own measures on inheritance tax and failure to match lost EU subsidies are really doing the farming community harm?
Many will say it’s better to be safe than sorry, but the question remains whether the ban is proportionate or even well targeted on likely sources of infection.
Image: No more gourmet chorizo brought back from Spain for you. File pic: iStock
A ‘Brexit benefit’? Don’t be fooled
The EU has already introduced emergency measures to contain the disease where it has been found. Several thousand cattle in Hungary and Slovenia have been vaccinated or destroyed.
The UK’s ability to impose the ban is not “a benefit of Brexit”. Member nations including the UK were perfectly able to ban the movement of animals and animal products during the “mad cow disease” outbreak in the 1990s, much to the annoyance of the British government of the day.
Since leaving the EU, England, Scotland and Wales are no longer under EU veterinary regulation.
Northern Ireland still is because of its open border with the Republic. The latest ban does not cover people coming into Northern Ireland, Jersey, Guernsey, or the Isle of Man.
Rather than introducing further red tape of its own, the British government is supposed to be seeking closer “alignment” with the EU on animal and vegetable trade – SPS or “sanitary and phytosanitary” measures, in the jargon.
Image: A ban on cheese? That’s anything but cracking. Pic: iStock
UK can’t shake ties to EU
The reasons for this are obvious and potentially make or break for food producers in this country.
The EU is the recipient of 67% of UK agri-food exports, even though this has declined by more than 5% since Brexit.
The introduction of full, cumbersome, SPS checks has been delayed five times but are due to come in this October. The government estimates the cost to the industry will be £330m, food producers say it will be more like £2bn.
With Brexit, the UK became a “third country” to the EU, just like the US or China or any other nation. The UK’s ties to the European bloc, however, are much greater.
Half of the UK’s imports come from the EU and 41% of its exports go there. The US is the UK’s single largest national trading partner, but still only accounts for around 17% of trade, in or out.
The difference in the statistics for travellers are even starker – 77% of trips abroad from the UK, for business, leisure or personal reasons, are to EU countries. That is 66.7 million visits a year, compared to 4.5 million or 5% to the US.
And that was in 2023, before Donald Trump and JD Vance’s hostile words and actions put foreign visitors off.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:40
Trump: ‘Europe is free-loading’
More bureaucratic botheration
Meanwhile, the UK and the EU are making travel between them more bothersome for their citizens and businesses.
This October, the EU’s much-delayed EES or Entry Exit System is due to come into force. Every foreigner will be required to provide biometric information – including fingerprints and scans – every time they enter or leave the Schengen area.
From October next year, visitors from countries including the UK will have to be authorised in advance by ETIAS, the European Travel and Authorisation System. Applications will cost seven euros and will be valid for three years.
Since the beginning of this month, European visitors to the UK have been subject to similar reciprocal measures. They must apply for an ETA, an Electronic Travel Authorisation. This lasts for two years or until a passport expires and costs £16.
The days of freedom of movement for people, goods, and services between the UK and its neighbours are long gone.
The British economy has lost out and British citizens and businesses suffer from greater bureaucratic botheration.
Nor has immigration into the UK gone down since leaving the EU. The numbers have actually gone up, with people from Commonwealth countries, including India, Pakistan and Nigeria, more than compensating for EU citizens who used to come and go.
Image: Editor’s note: Hands off my focaccia sandwiches with prosciutto! Pic: iStock
Will European reset pay off?
The government is talking loudly about the possible benefits of a trade “deal” with Trump’s America.
Meanwhile, minister Nick Thomas Symonds and the civil servant Mike Ellam are engaged in low-profile negotiations with Europe – which could be of far greater economic and social significance.
The public will have to wait to see what progress is being made at least until the first-ever EU-UK summit, due to take place on 19 May this year.
Hard-pressed British food producers and travellers – not to mention young people shut out of educational opportunities in Europe – can only hope that Sir Keir Starmer considers their interests as positively as he does sucking up to the Trump administration.
A 41-year-old man from Penylan has been charged with murder, preventing lawful and decent burial of a dead body and assaulting a person occasioning them actual bodily harm.
A 48-year-old woman from London has been charged with preventing a lawful and decent burial of a dead body and conspiring to pervert the course of justice.
They both appeared at Cardiff Magistrates’ Court on Saturday.
“This brings our search for Paria to a sad and tragic end,” said Detective Chief Inspector Matt Powell.
“Paria’s family, all those who knew her, and those in her local community, will be deeply saddened and shocked by these latest developments.
“Family liaison officers are continuing to support Paria’s family.”