Parliamentary watchdog needs 'overhaul' for public to trust MPs
|
Version 0 of 1. Kathryn Hudson, the parliamentary standards commissioner, should end the outdated practice of only accepting complaints by formal letter, according to MPs unhappy with her approach to investigations. Andrew Bridgen, a Conservative MP who has made several unsuccessful complaints to Hudson, questioned the watchdog’s record and urged her to make it easier for people to submit allegations.“The perception is there appears to be a lack of appetite to properly investigate reports of misconduct,” he said. “This is unhealthy. When you look recently, one of those investigations absolutely contradicts the finding of a court hearing in the case of MP Tim Yeo. “That is not going to give the public confidence. And we certainly need to overhaul this arcane practice of all complaints having to be received in writing. It is time for them to move into the internet era.” Hudson’s work is under increasing scrutiny after she criticised a media sting that exposed the willingness of two former foreign secretaries, Jack Straw and Malcolm Rifkind, to be hired by journalists posing as lobbyists. The programme alleged that Straw boasted to undercover journalists that he had operated “under the radar” to use his influence and change EU rules on behalf of a firm that paid him £60,000 a year, while Rifkind reportedly claimed to be able to gain useful access to every British ambassador in the world. Hudson found in September that the two men had been misrepresented by the media and their words distorted, while there was no breach of the rules on paid lobbying. The Commons standards committee of MPs, which make the final decision on sanctions, were even more critical of the journalism than Hudson, saying their colleagues had been unfairly portrayed and damaged. But Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, took a different view this week. It found the journalism of Channel 4 in relation to Rifkind and Straw had been fair and the investigation significantly in the public interest. It comes just weeks after Tim Yeo, a Tory former minister and select committee chair, was found by a judge to have given some evidence that was not true or honest about his financial interests. As a result, the ex-MP failed in his libel claim against the Sunday Times, which had conducted a media sting in which he offered to act as a paid parliamentary advocate who would push for new laws to benefit the business of a client for a daily fee of £7,000. Yeo too had been cleared by Hudson and his fellow MPs of breaching the parliamentary code of conduct regarding lobbying and second jobs. The two cases that have led Paul Flynn and John Mann, two campaigning Labour MPs, to call for an overhaul of the system again, with Flynn worrying that parliament is “slipping back into sleaze”. He has called for a judge to take charge of Hudson’s role. It is only recently that Hudson’s record has come under the spotlight. Towards the beginning of her tenure, the watchdog’s reports led to the downfall of Maria Miller, who resigned as culture secretary after her findings of an expenses breach under the old regime, and sealed the end of the political career of Patrick Mercer, who had resigned over a lobbying scandal following a sting by BBC Panorama and the Daily Telegraph. One MP, who sat on the standards committee in the last parliament, and worked with Hudson, said he found her to have been very thorough and generally put members through under intense pressure while they were being investigated.But he thought her experience of delivering a harsh verdict on Miller had perhaps been something of a turning point. Members on the committee had watered down her recommendation that Miller repay £45,000 to a sum of £5,800, while making it clear that they felt she had gone beyond her remit – or “riding off into the sunset on a silly adventure”, as one of them put it to the Guardian.The fate of Elizabeth Filkin, one of her predecessors, also casts a long shadow over the job of parliamentary commissioner for standards. Filkin, who accused Labour former ministers John Reid and Keith Vaz of trying to frustrate her inquiries, did not reapply for her job in 2001 after upsetting members of the government and prominent Tories. Related: Tim Yeo loses 'cash-for-advocacy' libel case against Sunday Times As well as the Straw, Rifkind and Yeo findings, critics of Hudson point to a string of cases that Hudson has declined to examine. These include allegations that Tory MP Lucy Allan concocted a death threat from a constituent, about the conduct of Michelle Thomson who resigned the SNP whip over a police investigation into her property lawyer, and comments by Sir Gerald Kaufman about “Jewish money” influencing government policy on Israel. These incidents were deemed either to have insufficient evidence to justify an inquiry or to be beyond her remit to investigate, which covers only whether an MP has broken the guide to the rules relating to the conduct of members. Since the beginning of the financial year in April, more than 340 people have contacted the commissioner to complain about an MP. But after being given advice on whether it might be possible for her to investigate, only 52 of those wrote a formal letter of complaint, which needs to be received as a hard copy. By October, only three of these had led to inquiries being opened – or less than 1% of the original grievances logged by telephone, email or paper. Over her tenure, about one in 10 formal complaints submitted has resulted in a full inquiry. MPs on the standards committee have previously recommended that she accepts complaints by email, in a report that she welcomed, but this would require a debate on reform of the system in the House of Commons.Sir Nick Harvey, a former Lib Dem MP, who sat on both the standards committee and its predecessor, said people should must realise that the commissioner can only act within the boundaries of her job. “I think while no system is perfect, this works pretty well,” he said. “One must remember the commissioner and committee are looking specifically about whether there has been a breach of parliament’s rules. Just because they conclude there has not been, it doesn’t mean the MP might not be found to transgress some other rule or regulation somewhere else. But that’s not a matter for the House of Commons.” However, that is a hard message to convey to members of the public who look to the standards commissioner for redress but find she is unable to help. The reputation of the standards committee, which oversees her work, was further undermined in October, when one of its Geoffrey Cox, Tory MP for Torridge and West Devon, had to resign from the body over allegations he was late to declare payment for legal work, including his successful defence of the former premier of the Cayman Islands against charges of corruption. He is now himself the subject of an inquiry by Hudson. Cox is one of five MPs still under investigation by the commissioner at the moment, two of which have the potential to be particularly contentious. The first is the case of Justin Tomlinson, the minister for the disabled, who is alleged to have passed a draft parliamentary report to an employee of the payday loan company Wonga. Another is the high-profile and emotive case of Alistair Carmichael, who has admitted lying about having authorised the leak of a confidential memo suggesting Nicola Sturgeon would have preferred David Cameron than Ed Milband to be prime minister – an account that has been vehemently denied. Last night, the commissioner’s office confirmed that she has also begun an inquiry into the conduct of Phil Boswell, an SNP member, who was reported over allegations he failed to declare outside interests. A spokeswoman for Hudson said she does not comment on criticism of her role. |