Committee on Standards — 3 Nov 2021 at 15:15

That this House–
“Long investigations are undesirable…place the Member concerned under considerable strain”-
“should be conducted as expeditiously as possible, so long as rigour and fairness are not compromised.”
“the same or similar rights as apply to those subject to investigations of alleged misconduct in other workplaces and professions, including the right of representation, examination of witnesses and appeal”,
“The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blessed:
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes”.
“the offer of money or other advantage to any Member of Parliament for the promoting of any matter whatsoever…in Parliament, is a high crime and misdemeanour”.
“This is an egregious case of paid advocacy”.
“repeatedly…used his privileged position…to secure benefits for two companies for whom he was a paid consultant”,
“has brought the House into disrepute.”
“No previous case of paid advocacy has seen so many breaches or such a clear pattern of behaviour in failing to separate private and public interests.”
“Achieving change in this place is tough, but today’s amendment could lead to a standards system that is fairer for all. It is so sad that it takes a tragedy for the House to act.”
“if so requested by the Committee”
“as to the extent to which its proceedings have been consistent with the principles of natural justice”.
“the procedure is consistent with natural justice and similar or identical to workplaces up and down the country.”
“Each of Mr Paterson’s several instances of paid advocacy would merit a suspension of several days, but the fact that he has repeatedly failed to perceive his conflict of interest and used his privileged position as a Member of Parliament to secure benefits for two companies for whom he was a paid consultant, is even more concerning. He has brought the House into disrepute.”
“a greater element of independence was required, and that having seven lay members and seven parliamentary Members on the Standards Committee…provides the right balance-having the memory and the corporate understanding of being in this place, while at the same time ensuring that we can benefit from the experience and knowledge of independent lay members.”-[Official Report, 7 January 2019; Vol. 652, c. 128.]
“ensuring that the PCS can operate independently…is vital and will better enable justice for those seeking recourse.”-[Official Report, 7 January 2019; Vol. 652, c. 127.]
“A Member is entitled to contest, even vigorously contest, the Commissioner’s interpretation of the rules and her findings. We do not mark down any Member for doing so.”
“There have been times when I have been ashamed of being a Member of this House, I don’t want to go back to that.”

Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con248 (+2 tell) 12072.0%
DUP1 0012.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 1050.0%
Lab0 169 (+2 tell)084.7%
LDem0 10090.9%
PC0 1033.3%
SDLP0 1050.0%
SNP0 32066.7%
Total:249 228074.9%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
Aaron BellNewcastle-under-LymeCon (front bench)no
Jackie Doyle-PriceThurrockCon (front bench)no
Richard FullerNorth East BedfordshireCon (front bench)no
Kate GriffithsBurtonConno
Mark HarperForest of DeanConno
Simon HoareNorth DorsetCon (front bench)no
Kevin HollinrakeThirsk and MaltonConno
Nigel MillsAmber ValleyCon (front bench)no
Holly Mumby-CroftScunthorpeConno
Matthew OffordHendonCon (front bench)no
John StevensonCarlisleCon (front bench)no
William WraggHazel GroveCon (front bench)no

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive