This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/08/maria-miller-row-mps-standards-legal-fears

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Maria Miller row: reform of MPs' standards may fail due to legal fears Maria Miller row: reform of MPs' standards may fail due to legal fears
(35 minutes later)
Moves to reform the Commons standards committee that reduced Maria Miller's expenses fine could be blocked because they would leave parliament open to legal challenge, it has emerged. Efforts to reform the Commons standards committee that reduced Maria Miller's expenses fine could be blocked because they would leave parliament open to legal challenge, it has emerged.
There is a groundswell of support for changing the committee, which deals with MPs' conduct, including pre-2010 expenses offences, and includes three lay members who unlike the MPs who sit on it are not allowed to vote on judgments and sanctions. There is a groundswell of support for changing the committee, which deals with MPs' conduct, including pre-2010 expenses offences, and includes three lay members who, unlike the MPs who sit on it, are not allowed to vote on judgments and sanctions.
There have been calls to give the lay members votes to counter accusations that MPs are being allowed to police themselves. But fears that the decisions of the committee would be open to legal challenge has blocked lay members being given voting rights, it has emerged.There have been calls to give the lay members votes to counter accusations that MPs are being allowed to police themselves. But fears that the decisions of the committee would be open to legal challenge has blocked lay members being given voting rights, it has emerged.
Only three months ago, the leader of the House, Andrew Lansley, blocked a proposal to pass a statute to give the standards committee protection from court challenge in the event of lay members sitting on the committee being given voting rights. Only three months ago, the leader of the House, Andrew Lansley, blocked a proposal to pass a statute to give the standards committee protection from court challenge in the event of lay members sitting on the committee being given voting rights. The chair of the standards committee, Kevin Barron, had urged the government, and the committees examining the issue of Commons privilege, to ensure lay members were given voting rights, saying: "I cannot overstate how important it is that lay members should be able to participate on the same basis that MPs do".
The chair of the standards committee, Kevin Barron, had urged the government, and the committees examining the issue of Commons privilege to ensure lay members voting rights, saying: "I cannot overstate how important it is that lay members should be able to participate on the same basis that MPs do". John Bercow, the speaker, granted an urgent question on Tuesday to the Labour MP John Mann, who has led calls for Miller to resign after she was ordered to pay back thousands of pounds and make an apology to the Commons.
John Bercow, the speaker, granted an urgent question on Tuesday to Labour MP John Mann, who has led calls for Miller to resign after she was ordered to pay back thousands of pounds and make an apology to the Commons.
Lansley is to respond in a debate at 12.30pm, which will be limited to the work of the Commons standards committee of MPs, which has come in for criticism over its verdict. It asked Miller to repay £5,800 in over-claimed mortgage expenses when an independent commissioner originally estimated that she should hand back £45,000.Lansley is to respond in a debate at 12.30pm, which will be limited to the work of the Commons standards committee of MPs, which has come in for criticism over its verdict. It asked Miller to repay £5,800 in over-claimed mortgage expenses when an independent commissioner originally estimated that she should hand back £45,000.
Critics have argued that MPs should not still be policing themselves almost five years after the expenses scandal of 2009. Since 2010, a compliance officer at the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) has dealt with complaints about MPs expenses. However, other ethical matters ultimately come under the jurisdiction of the Commons standards committee. The prime minister, David Cameron, has signalled he is "very open" to changes in how the committee works, potentially including a greater role for non-MP lay members. Critics have argued that MPs should not still be policing themselves almost five years after the expenses scandal of 2009. Since 2010, a compliance officer at the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) has dealt with complaints about MPs' expenses. However, other ethical matters ultimately come under the jurisdiction of the Commons standards committee. David Cameron has signalled that he is "very open" to changes in how the committee works, potentially including a greater role for non-MP members.
Barron is understood to be angry at what he regards as unimpressive arguments about parliamentary privilege blocking any reform, and is determined to raise the issue again.Barron is understood to be angry at what he regards as unimpressive arguments about parliamentary privilege blocking any reform, and is determined to raise the issue again.
Lansley appears to have blocked the proposal after the current clerk of the Commons, Sir Robert Rogers, and his predecessor, Sir Malcolm Jack, vehemently opposed the idea.Lansley appears to have blocked the proposal after the current clerk of the Commons, Sir Robert Rogers, and his predecessor, Sir Malcolm Jack, vehemently opposed the idea.
Cameron and Labour have called for lay members to be given a vote on the standards committee in a bid to dispel the impression that MPs mark their own homework. Cameron at one point last week said he thought the lay members on the joint committee had a casting vote. Cameron and Labour have called for lay members to be given a vote on the standards committee in an effort to dispel the impression that MPs mark their own homework. Cameron at one point last week said he thought the lay members on the joint committee had a casting vote.
At present, lay members can join discussions on the conduct of MPs, including recently the behavior of the culture secretary. The standards committee has been widely criticised for watering down the recommendations of the independent parliamentary commissioner that investigates complaints against MPs and then reports its finding to the standards committee. At present, lay members can join discussions on the conduct of MPs, including recently the behaviour of the culture secretary. The standards committee has been widely criticised for watering down the recommendations of the independent parliamentary commissioner that investigates complaints against MPs and then reports its finding to the standards committee.
The lay members are intended to help MPs on the committee see misconduct from the perspective of the general public and prevent parliamentary reform being bogged down and delayed, MPs agreed in principle in December 2010 to a recommendation from the committee on standards in public life first made in 2009 that the two lay members sit on the standards committee. Sir George Young, the then Conservative chair of the standards committee first proposed the idea. MPs then voted to endorse three nominated lay members in December 2012. The lay members are intended to help MPs on the committee see misconduct from the perspective of the public and prevent parliamentary reform being bogged down and delayed. MPs agreed in principle in December 2010 to a recommendation from the committee on standards in public life first made in 2009 that the two lay members sit on the standards committee. Sir George Young, then Conservative chair of the standards committee, first proposed the idea. MPs voted in December 2012 to endorse three nominated lay members.
Barron at the time of the appointment of the three lay members enthusiastically welcomed the reform,, and looked forward to them being given the vote. He said: "It is all too easy for any expert group to look inward and to lose a sense of perspective, which is why many professional disciplinary bodies, not just the General Medical Councils, contain lay members. At the time of the appointment of the three lay members, Barron enthusiastically welcomed the reform, and looked forward to them being given the vote. He said: "It is all too easy for any expert group to look inward and to lose a sense of perspective, which is why many professional disciplinary bodies, not just the General Medical Councils, contain lay members.
"Even when professional judgments are perfect, there is a case for an independent element to ensure that all angles are considered and, most importantly, to provide as much reassurance as possible that regulation is conducted in the public interest. It will never be possible to convince everyone, but if an independent element in regulation works for doctors and solicitors, it should work for us as well. I hope that the lay members will not operate as outsiders riding shotgun to ensure the committee behaves. I would like them to be an integral part of the committee.""Even when professional judgments are perfect, there is a case for an independent element to ensure that all angles are considered and, most importantly, to provide as much reassurance as possible that regulation is conducted in the public interest. It will never be possible to convince everyone, but if an independent element in regulation works for doctors and solicitors, it should work for us as well. I hope that the lay members will not operate as outsiders riding shotgun to ensure the committee behaves. I would like them to be an integral part of the committee."
He expressed his regret that lay members did not have a vote from the outset, even though there was a formal mechanism for them to register a view.He expressed his regret that lay members did not have a vote from the outset, even though there was a formal mechanism for them to register a view.
The proposal for voting rights then became entangled in a wider government plans set out in a green paper to reform parliamentary privilege, proposals that were then rejected by a joint committee of both houses and by the procedure committee, with the clerks of the Commons strongly opposing legislation on the grounds that it might undermine the rights of parliament. The proposal for voting rights then became entangled in wider government plans set out in a green paper to reform parliamentary privilege, proposals that were then rejected by a joint committee of both houses and by the procedure committee, with the clerks of the Commons strongly opposing legislation on the grounds that it might undermine the rights of parliament.
The failure to reform the standards committee also follows a failure of the government to take up reforms to the MPs code of conduct proposed by the standards committee.The failure to reform the standards committee also follows a failure of the government to take up reforms to the MPs code of conduct proposed by the standards committee.
Barron's committee set out proposals to adopt reforms to the code, including on declaring interests in lobbying, but the plans have not been put by government to MPs to vote on.Barron's committee set out proposals to adopt reforms to the code, including on declaring interests in lobbying, but the plans have not been put by government to MPs to vote on.