“Shame!”
Reminiscent of one of the most memorable scenes from Games of Thrones, the House of Commons had its own version of public indignation last week, albeit in a slightly different setting.
Meet Owen Paterson. Tory MP for North Shropshire for the last 24 years, previously Northern Ireland Minister, and all around veteran of the political process in Westminster. Next to the £81,000 p.a. plus expenses he receives for being an MP, he also earned £100,000 p.a. in the last 5 years as consultant (read, lobbyist) for two major companies – Randox (pharma) and Lynn’s Country Foods (food). Now, the problem is not so much with being a sitting MP and giving advice to those who ask for it about how the process works, who to talk to, or to make some introductions. The problem is very much with being a lobbyist while you are an MP.
Paterson mixed public duty and private greed on 14 different occasions between 2016 and 2020 – and that’s only the number of events that could be proven. He either approached governmental agencies on behest of above companies directly, or failed to declare that he is a paid consultant for them. He conducted meetings as consultant in his parliamentary office, and used Westminster stationary when writing letters for his side business. All this is part of the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards – an independent position inside Westminster to ensure that MPs behave at least halfway decent. The Commissioner delivers their report to the Committee on Standards which decides what to do with MPs who don’t behave. It’s either a slap on the wrist or even a few days locked out of the House of Commons, for which they wouldn’t get paid. Not that it matters much, given the amount MPs usually receive. In Paterson’s case, however,
The Committee found that Mr Paterson’s actions were an egregious case of paid advocacy, that he repeatedly used his privileged position to benefit two companies for whom he was a paid consultant, and that this has brought the House into disrepute.
Standards Committee Report
The punishment was to be 30 days suspension from the HoC.
The Committee’s decision is usually confirmed by MPs in a vote in the HoC, and that never raises an eyebrow, and it never makes the news. Except this time. The excrement started moving towards the air conditioning when one-time Leader of the House and now Tory backbencher Andrea Leadsom amended the vote, aiming to dissolve the current Standards Committee and rewriting the rules of conduct & the procedures of appeal, plus setting up a new Standards body within the HoC with a built-in Tory majority. ‘Removing all checks and balances to give Tory corruption free reign’ would have been a tad more honest and a lot shorter on the bill. Speaker Lindsey Hoyle selected this amendment and put it to vote, and I’m not sure what he was thinking there. Either, he did as he was told, or he was hoping for the fall-out that followed. There was a three-line whip attached, i.e. Tory MPs where told to vote for this amendment, no matter what. Most followed the party line – the vote & amendment carried 250 to 232. But it showed that not all Tory MPs had taken leave of their senses and common decency yet. 50 or so abstained, 13 of them opposed, one of whom got fired as ministerial aid immediately after.
And then the shitstorm happened.
Cries of “Shame!” echoed through the Chamber immediately after the vote was announced. Both Labour, SNP, and LibDems refused to name members for this “new” committee and the words “kangaroo court” were shouted. The papers the next morning were ablaze with “sleaze” comments. But as always – this government doesn’t do public opinion, and in best “Carry On”-style, ministers were sent out to do TV interviews defending the indefensible. Or, digging even deeper, like in the case of Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng, who just couldn’t help himself:
I think it’s difficult to see what the future of the commissioner is, given the fact that we’re reviewing the process and we’re overturning and trying to reform this whole process. But it’s up to the commissioner to decide her position.
You don’t like the report, so you attack the office of the Commissioner, or the Commissioner herself, naturally. But he was pretty much alone in his assessment. The current chair of the Commons Standards Committee, Chris Bryant, summed up perfectly what most onlookers were thinking:
At the end of the day, some people decided – and this is the very definition of injustice – they decided at the very last minute, for a named individual, they would change the rules. That is not what we do in this country. That is what they do in Russia.
Hear, hear.
Stacking the deck
I’m not sure what Boris Johnson was actually thinking here. Yes, the idea of Johnson having a coherent thought is an oxymoron, but you never know. Did he really think a three-line whip would do it? The Tories have an 80-seat majority, so playing by the numbers would have played out. Did he consider the MPs mere sheeple like the rest who will be doing whatever they’re told? Most Tory MPs consider themselves above the rest of the people here anyway, so treating them like they’re one of the plebs was a gamble. Was he playing on their sense of party loyalty? Or their own self-interest? There are 8 MPs under investigation by the Commissioner herself, 5 of which are Tories. There are also 24 MPs either under investigation by the Standards Committee or with upheld complaints against them, 19 of which are Tories. The motion carried with 18 votes – you make what you want of it…
What is sure is that this was supposed to be a pre-emptive strike. Johnson himself is under investigation by the Electoral Commission and by the Standards Committee, for “free” holidays and the renovation of the PM’s flat in No 10. The idea of using this non-event to move the goal-posts of parliamentary procedure and stack the deck in your favour is very much a Johnson move. But not even cynical little ol’ me would have thought that he would be so brazenly obvious about it.
Twelve hours after the motion in the HoC, and two hours after Kwarteng bullied the Commissioner on public television, Boris Johnson et al did a screeching U-turn, and the papers were having another field day. It was a “mistake” to conflate the issue of necessary reforms to the Standards procedures with the case of an individual MP, was the official argument. So, the “new” committee would not be established until there was cross-party support, the current Commissioner would keep her job, and Paterson’s case, i.e. suspension, would be voted on again next week, without the whip. Never mind the massive amount of egg on the government’s face. Even Leadsom had to admit that she “regretted” her actions. As one Tory MP put it:
It has been a total shitshow. He looks like an idiot, and we all look like idiots. How dumb do you have to be?
Excellent question.
What did Paterson have to say in all this? Not much. First, he admitted to the misuse of Westminster stationary, but noting else. Then, he claimed to be a whistle-blower, raising concerns with the Food Safety Administration when he approached them on behalf of Randox. Yeah, because whistle-blowers get paid to do that, right. Next, he cried foul and claimed that he wasn’t given the opportunity to defend himself. He was told in October 2019 that there was an investigation – he had two years to cooperate with the Commissioner. When that didn’t help, he attacked the Commissioner herself:
Nevertheless, the Commissioner made adverse findings of fact and since then, despite the evidence presented, she has not changed her views which on any basis were formed before any proper investigation had been undertaken. […] Not only has the Commissioner failed to act in accordance with natural justice, but she has also failed to follow basic guidance as to how to conduct an investigation. […] I am driven to believe that the Commissioner determined my guilt long before her inquiry finished, and probably as early as November/December 2020. […] For this to be the position within Parliament is shocking.
letter to the Committee Clerk, 23 July 2021
And finally, after the excrement had fully collided with the air conditioning and before the announced vote on his suspension, he quit. Triggering a by-election, but that is less important; North Shropshire is a very safe Conservative seat, unfortunately.