'In a case where evidence that the rules have been breached is so clear, this attempt to undermine the process is another example of those in power acting like the rules don’t apply to them.'

Anti-Corruption experts have warned that the government’s initial attempt to scrap the sleaze watchdog as part of efforts to let one of its own MPs off the hook is ‘behaviour consistent with state capture’.

The warning came after MPs voted yesterday to prevent Owen Paterson MP being suspended for 30 sitting days from the Commons. Last week, following a two-year investigation, Paterson was found guilty of an “egregious” breach of lobbying rules by the parliamentary watchdog.

An investigation by the parliamentary commissioner for standards, Kathryn Stone, found that Paterson had “repeatedly” used his position as an MP to benefit two firms who paid him as a consultant. The MPs’ watchdog recommended that he be suspended for 30 days.

Yesterday afternoon, MPs voted 250 – 232 in favour of overturning Paterson’s suspension, and reforming current standards procedures. That led to widespread condemnation from MPs, including Labour leader Keir Starmer who tweeted: “Corruption. There is no other word for it.”

Since then, the government has been forced into a humiliating u-turn, after condemnation from the opposition as well as from some of its own MPs. Opposition parties refused to work with the government in its attempts to change the disciplinary process leading to a climbdown.

MPs are now likely to be asked to vote again on whether Mr Paterson should be excluded from Parliament for 30 days.

Green Party MP Caroline Lucas tweeted before the vote: “Imagine being convicted of an offence but instead of serving a sentence, your mates *arrange* a review of the justice system to let you off scot-free.

“That’s what Tories are trying to do. It’s a shameful undermining of an independent system of scrutiny to save one of their own.”

Following the initial attempt to scrap the sleaze watchdog, anti-corruption experts issued some pretty scathing criticism of the government. Reacting to the news, the director of the Centre for the Study of Corruption at the University of Sussex, Prof Elizabeth David-Barrett said: “In a case where evidence that the rules have been breached is so clear, this attempt to undermine the process is another example of those in power acting like the rules don’t apply to them. And if the rules threaten to constrain them, they try to change the rules.

“That is behaviour consistent with state capture, which we see around the world from several governments who are deliberately moving away from democracy by undermining the checks and balances on power which are fundamental to democratic government.”

Campaign organisation Transparency International UK said that MPs who backed the motion had sent a ‘clear signal that they believe there should be one set of rules for them, and another set for everyone else.’

Daniel Bruce, Chief Executive of Transparency International UK, said: “Instead of punishing an MP for serious breaches of the rules, which were determined by a thorough and independent investigation, the party of government instead opted to simply scrap the rules. This is hugely damaging for trust in our democracy and the rule of law.

“This week, Parliament’s ethics watchdog made a series of significant recommendations to improve integrity and standards by our elected representatives. Just two days later, MPs have voted to do away with the system responsible for overseeing their behaviour as well as the rules stopping them from acting as paid lobbyists – which have existed in some form for more than 300 years.”

Basit Mahmood is editor of Left Foot Forward

Comments are closed.