I attended and listened closely to the debates on these issues which have taken place in parliament recently. Having listened to the case made by Andrea Leadsom MP and others that there was a risk of perceived injustice in the system, I was content to support the government in the initial vote on this matter. For the avoidance of doubt, this made no judgement in respect of Owen Paterson who in my view was clearly in breach of the rules, but having served as a magistrate locally and having undertaken various disciplinary processes in my working life, I accept the point that there should be a route of independent appeal which would have been open to him had Owen Paterson been accused of any other misdemeanour in his role as an MP. The Committee on Standards had already indicated that this was a concern that needed to be addressed. As was made clear to me, this deferred the decision on the matter of Owen Paterson for a maximum of three months whilst the issue of procedural fairness was considered and did not overturn the decision of the Committee on Standards in his case.
Subsequent events including in particular Owen Paterson’s response to the situation undermined the confidence that I and other MPs could have in this situation and I welcome Mr Paterson’s decision to step down as an MP. I also welcome the fact that the Committee on Standards will be issuing a report on improving the route of appeal which makes the envisaged purpose of Andrea Leadsom’s amendment redundant.
The Committee on Standards submitted a report which came before the House on the 16th and I supported its recommendations.
