Strengthening Standards in Public Life

The hon. Member reminded that this is not a free-for-all debate but on specific subject matter, insisting that interventions must be relevant and to the point.

Asked about the consistency of Labour's position on second jobs and highlighted discrepancies based on actions taken by the Leader of the Opposition.

Inquired if the hon. Member was aware that 'Tory' originates from an Irish word for outlaw or robber, suggesting that the current Government fits this description given their actions.

Commented on past Labour Members of Parliament receiving jail sentences and questioned the suitability of Labour MPs to speak on standards in public life.

Agreed with the Leader of the House that the reason for attempting to change the rulebook was due to clouded judgment from a friend's situation, emphasising the importance of constituents' situations over personal connections.

Noted a resolution passed by the Communication Workers Union regarding funding to specific Labour candidates and campaigns that support CWU industrial and political aims.

He stated that people owe their seats in Parliament to trade union funding and would lobby for unions regardless of direct or indirect payments.

Asked if the Scottish Conservative party's use of limited partnerships undermines democracy, implying that it does so fundamentally.

Questioned why Labour would not categorically state they will not send high-value donors to the House of Lords for a five-year period.

Defended trade unions' political funding as regulated under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, funded by working people, and properly registered.

Asked if Eleanor Laing condones the Leader of the Opposition earning over £110,000 since becoming an MP.

Expressed dismay at the quality and tone of interventions from Government Members, feeling they drag the House into the gutter rather than elevating it.

Asserted that full-time MPs do not have time to engage in other paid work outside of parliamentary duties and constituency affairs, implying that those who do are 'on the take'.

Asked if the same standards should apply to all parliamentarians, including those in the House of Lords, noting examples where they do not.

Pointed out that the Government has failed to change rules retrospectively for Members found guilty of sexual misconduct, unlike for corruption cases.

Questioned why a Labour government would reform lobbying when their last stint in power did nothing to do so and they voted against relevant legislation.

Challenged Conservative Members for lacking humility given the Government's past attempts to change rules conveniently for accused members.

Critiques the Government's handling of second jobs for MPs, supporting a Labour motion to address the issue through the Committee on Standards in Public Life. Emphasises the need for MPs to be exclusively dedicated to their constituents without profiteering from second jobs.

Emphasised that MPs are not entitled to a fair hearing and highlighted the complexities involved in discussing outside interests. He also stressed the importance of accountability but cautioned against labelling the House as corrupt.

Supported banning second jobs for MPs, acknowledging that some exceptions could be made for public service roles like doctors and nurses. He argued against excessive earnings from outside work while being an MP and criticised the defence of bringing in experience as a justification for high-paying side jobs.

Agrees with the need for change but urges caution to ensure new rules are fair, consistent and enforceable. Suggests a cap on earnings or hours related to secondary employment to prevent conflicts of interest without creating overly complex regulations.

Critiques the current focus on political scandals rather than pressing social issues. Emphasises the importance of integrity in elected positions and supports the motion to address conflicts of interest.

I share the concern expressed by Steven Bonnar about the Prime Minister’s response to a question about corruption. I want to reassure my hon. Friend Sir Charles Walker that there are more things we can do to prevent further issues. I have a list of proposals for strengthening parliamentary standards, including cleaning up and improving the process, making ministerial meetings more transparent, and reinforcing ACOBA's role in ensuring compliance with civil service codes. Additionally, I support legislation for Government contracts procurement and economic crime transparency.

We need to strengthen standards in public life due to the current state of affairs. The Conservative Government's actions have led to a lack of accountability, with officials taking responsibility for policy failures while political allies are protected from blame. The Prime Minister's inability to name specific actions taken to deliver integrity and probity highlights the low bar set by this Government. This demonstrates that despite claims of high standards, their actions often contradict these principles.

Mr. Johnston expressed concerns about the debate on outside interests and their impact on public perception of MPs, highlighting that some Members have questions to answer but that a better argument exists for bringing skills and expertise from outside roles into Parliament. He emphasised that constituencies should come first and acknowledged the need to tighten rules while maintaining the importance of outside interests in improving legislation. Mr. Johnston also critiqued the divide between private and public sector work, arguing against the notion that one is inherently good or bad. He raised concerns about social mobility issues within politics, suggesting reforms to make the House more inclusive for those from ordinary backgrounds and with disabilities, and advocated for a family-friendly environment. Lastly, he warned of the negative impact on recruitment if MPs are perceived as solely focused on personal gain.

Madders argues that being an MP is a great responsibility and should not be a means for personal gain. He criticises MPs who take on consultancy or lobbying roles as it undermines the authority of elected representatives and damages public trust in democracy. Madders also highlights the Government's actions last week to overturn procedures, suggesting this reflects arrogance and contempt for probity. He concludes by emphasising that Parliament should be an exemplar of good practice and transparency.

Browne welcomes the debate on strengthening standards in public life and declares a past interest as a Lobby journalist. He acknowledges the high standards already present in UK politics but advocates for even higher ones to maintain trust in democracy. Browne supports banning payment and jobs for political and parliamentary consultancy, arguing that MPs should not have conflicts of interest while serving their constituents. He also favours recommendation 1 from the Committee on Standards in Public Life report, which limits outside work. Browne concludes by noting reservations about the Labour motion's exclusion of recommendation 1 but supports the Prime Minister’s amendment as it covers both parliamentary and political consultancy.

Critiques the ethical standards and transparency of MPs across both government and opposition benches, highlighting specific cases of financial conflicts and extracurricular activities. Argues for stricter regulations on second jobs, disclosure requirements, and calls for reform or abolition of the House of Lords.

He declared his interest as a member of the Standards Committee and discussed public distrust towards MPs. He criticised the Opposition for opportunism rather than showing leadership, suggesting they should work across parties to improve trust in politics instead of instructing the Standards Committee. Mark Fletcher expressed support for paragraph 1 of the opposition motion but not paragraphs 2 and 3 due to concerns about unintended consequences on diversity of careers among MPs.

He thanked his shadow Leader of the House and Front Bench team for their efforts in improving standards in Parliament. Tan Dhesi criticised Conservative party members for cronyism, corruption, and nepotism, stating that certain MPs’ immoral actions have gone unpunished due to intervention by the Prime Minister. He highlighted the £8 million earned by Conservative MPs alongside their salaries and emphasised the importance of transparency and stopping corrupt practices from eroding democracy.

Seely criticises the lack of a foreign lobbying Act in the UK, noting that the US and Australia have such legislation. He emphasises the need for transparency in foreign influence activities and raises concerns about ethical issues related to MPs being political consultants. Seely also mentions the importance of addressing corruption and the influence of foreign entities on civil servants and universities.

Acknowledged the importance of cleaning up relationships between business and politics but emphasised that MPs must put national interests above friendship. He supported the Prime Minister's proposal to ensure MPs spend reasonable time on their constituents' concerns and to stop political lobbying, while also calling for reforms to be implemented carefully.

Mr Cowan asserts that standards exist but are not respected, highlighting past and current issues in Westminster. He mentions the Select Committee on Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs where he asked about principles and codes of conduct being effective if those in office bend rules. He supports Lord Evans's remarks indicating a culture of impunity seeping into British governance and stresses the need for elected Members to act solely in public interest, not line their pockets or seek personal favour.

Responds to Mr Cowan's point about Scotland’s governance model, highlighting that his local Isle of Wight Patrons Club is completely unaffiliated with the Conservative Party and the Isle of Wight Conservative Association.

Mr Western emphasises the commitment to constituents, referring to Nolan principles established in 1995. He expresses deep concern over recent actions by Members violating these principles, notably Owen Paterson's case. He criticises the Government for seeking to pause the recommendation of suspension from the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and urges a need for rigorous standards.

Mr Whitley discusses public confidence being severely damaged due to recent scandals involving Government Members. He critiques the Prime Minister's amendment as an attempt to water down measures needed for restoring trust and highlights Labour’s role in bringing forward a motion guaranteeing that elected members serve constituents, not corporations or lobbyists.

Being an MP gives us opportunities but it is about what doors we want opening and how we utilise that opportunity. Do we open them with the aim of aiding our constituents and for the common good, or do we open them with the aim of aiding personal gain and wealth? The second job scandal has uncovered rot at the heart of this place that must be resolved by this House.

Hon. Members who fail to separate their private interests for money or other benefits damage the integrity of Parliament. The Government’s interference in a live standards case has brought the House into disrepute. We must hold MPs to the highest standards and work together to improve them. The Prime Minister should come to the House and apologise for the damage done to Parliament’s reputation.

The web of influence from gifts, dinners, trips abroad, donations from the super-rich, and second jobs aim to get this House to work for the wealthy few. Since the start of the pandemic, MPs have made more than £6 million from lucrative second jobs. The scandal has exposed a corrupt Government led by a dodgy Prime Minister.

Expresses outrage at recent scandals and corruption within Parliament, criticises the Leader of the House for trying to cover up these issues, calls for transparency and accountability in appointments to the House of Lords, challenges the Prime Minister to allow a referendum on Scottish independence.

Argues that being an MP is a well-paid and full-time job, criticises MPs who seek second jobs for financial gain, labels these actions as short-changing the public and jeopardising democracy, calls for a ban on MPs taking outside interests.

Highlights the lack of action by the Government to address conflicts of interest among MPs, cites the 2018 report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life that warned about undermining trust in Parliament due to outside interests, calls for a ban on MPs providing paid services as strategists or advisers related to parliamentary matters.

Ms Anderson criticises the Government's amendment for being weak and not going far enough to address public concerns. She emphasises that Labour’s motion is clear in endorsing a ban on MPs taking lucrative contracts from companies with expectations of getting something back, and it sets a deadline for action by 31 January 2022. She argues that Conservative MPs should support the Labour amendment rather than voting for a weak Government proposal that could result in no changes at all.

No extracted contribution text available for this contributor yet.

Advised Members that if they shout in a certain way, it might influence how they vote.

Asked for clarification and scrutiny of the Government's guidance on social care costs cap, which may result in low-income elderly people having to pay more. Requested that Ministers come to the House to set out details of their proposals.