An Independent Politicians Complaints Commission, modeled on the Independent Police Complaints Commission, with its Board appointed by a panel of designated charitable or professional bodies, should be established to investigate accusations about national and local politicians, basing its judgments on the Nolan Principles that apply to all public bodies.
As a result of public concern with certain activities of the police force, the Independent Police Complaints Commission was set up. It is properly independent and has helped to investigate and determine the validity of various actions by the police.
Unfortunately the politicians have not seen fit to set up an equivalent body to investigate their own behaviour:
- Any sanctions against MPs or Lords for their activities are decided by other MPs or Lords who may well have, or at least be seen to have, a vested interest in maintaining generous arrangements and flexibility for their colleagues.
- Similarly the appointment and resignation of ministers is solely in the hands of the Prime Minister who is inevitably biased towards protecting the reputation of the minister concerned in order to try to prevent this from rebounding on the reputation of his or her party
Following the various scandals about MPs, there is now a Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. However in relation to any accusations of misconduct this role only involves being a collector of evidence which is then presented to the House of Commons Privileges Committee. (Previous holders of the office have indicated that they have often had a difficult time in getting evidence from MPs.) It is then the Committee which decides on any sanctions but it wields limited powers which normally relate just to the suspension of the MP for a matter of days.
Ministers are subject to The Ministerial Code of Conduct which is set out in a booklet that is required reading for all ministers. However any ministers who violate the Code are only subject to whatever investigation the Prime Minister feels is suitable. Typically the Prime Minister, who is the sole judge and jury of any breaches, will try to defend his or her ministers for as long as possible, often leading to further damaging revelations becoming public.
The Prime Minister now has an independent adviser to ascertain the facts when the Ministerial Code may have been breached. The first holder of this post was Sir John Bourn, appointed in 2006, but he was not asked to carry out any investigations of ministers although he did investigate a number of the returns that ministers had made under Section 5 (Ministers and Civil Servants) of the Ministerial Code. In accordance with the terms of his appointment, his advice was private and confidential. The current incumbent is Sir Philip Mawer. The Government is still resisting allowing the independent adviser to decide what to investigate or to report publicly.
Lord Hutton held an enquiry into the case of Dr David Kelly who committed suicide in relation to reports of 'sexing up' the Iraq Dossier. Ipsos/MORI commented on the Hutton Report:
'The public's lack of faith in politicians is highlighted in reaction to the Hutton Report on the circumstances leading to the death of Dr Kelly. The eminence of the judge did not stop 48% still believing that the Prime Minister lied about his role in Dr Kelly's exposure (according to ICM for The Guardian) and 56% believing that 'Lord Hutton as a member of the establishment was too ready to sympathise with the Government' (YouGov for The Telegraph).'
In other areas of public service, and indeed in the private sector, any employee found guilty of corruption or fiddling expenses is likely to be heavily disciplined and probably reported to the police. It is quite clear that the criminal law applies to all such incidents outside Parliament and there is no reason why it should not also do so for MPs and Lords. It is vital if respect for Parliament is to be increased that the public has faith that MPs and Lords are subject to the same sanctions as themselves if they go against the agreed rules and misspend public money or act in any other improper way.
It is clearly unacceptable for MPs, Lords or Ministers not to be subject to proper independent investigation and, if necessary, sanction if they have violated the agreed rules. It has become quite clear that self policing either by the Privileges Committee or by the Prime Minister is not only ineffective but undermines public confidence.
The Jury Team Latest
Warning: simplexml_load_file(http://www.juryteam.org/blog/?feed=rss) [function.simplexml-load-file]: failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 500 Internal Server Error in /var/www/juryteam/comn/func.inc.php on line 461
Warning: simplexml_load_file() [function.simplexml-load-file]: I/O warning : failed to load external entity "http://www.juryteam.org/blog/?feed=rss" in /var/www/juryteam/comn/func.inc.php on line 461
Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /var/www/juryteam/comn/func.inc.php on line 463
Follow The Jury Team
ABOUT
The Jury Team is a political movement created with the goal of making politics more accessible, politicians more accountable and political institutions more transparent.
JOIN THE JURY TEAM
Are you unhappy with the way things are? Do you believe they can change? By joining the Jury Team, you are becoming part of a political party like no other.
JURY TEAM BLOG
All the latest goings on within the Jury Team and our reaction to the big political stories as they break.
DONATE
The Jury Team relies on donations to keep running, but unlike other political parties, we abide by the recommendations of the Hayden Phillips report on party funding.