Debates between Darren Jones and Gregory Stafford during the 2024 Parliament

Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address

Debate between Darren Jones and Gregory Stafford
Monday 16th March 2026

(1 week, 2 days ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Darren Jones Portrait Darren Jones
- View Speech - Hansard - -

The Government did not wish to give £1 to Peter Mandelson, but, as the documents from tranche 1 revealed last week, the decision was based on advice that the quickest possible route to removing him from civil service employment was to provide a severance payment on the terms provided, and that that sum was lower than the anticipated cost of legal fees associated with an employment tribunal dispute.

Gregory Stafford Portrait Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

Two weeks ago, the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister gave me two pithy answers, so I ask him to do the same this week. First, did Peter Mandelson receive top-secret so-called STRAP security clearance? Secondly—we will try this question once again—did Peter Mandelson submit a declaration of interests? I want a yes or no to both those questions.

Darren Jones Portrait Darren Jones
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I refer the hon. Gentleman to my previous answer.

--- Later in debate ---
Darren Jones Portrait Darren Jones
- View Speech - Hansard - -

As I think I have said to the House before, the vast majority of people who apply to public service do so to serve the public and are honourable people who acknowledge and live the Nolan principles in every day of their work. What the Peter Mandelson example has shown—there have been others in the past—is that for all the rules in place that serve the majority well, there are still too many opportunities for those who wish to get around the rules. That is why the work that the Ethics and Integrity Commission is now doing will be vital in trying to prevent that from happening again.

Gregory Stafford Portrait Gregory Stafford
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker—and I apologise for not being able to give you notice of it. The ministerial code clearly states that Ministers must provide accurate information to this House. Under the duty of truthfulness, it states that Ministers are required to

“be as open as possible with Parliament”

and maintain high standards of accountability. That is not just in what they say, but what they fail to say. I know that you do not enforce the ministerial code, Madam Deputy Speaker, but would you expect a Minister who has misled the House by omission to return to the House to correct the record?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Darren Jones and Gregory Stafford
Thursday 5th March 2026

(2 weeks, 6 days ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Gregory Stafford Portrait Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

19. What recent progress he has made on implementing the humble Address of 4 February 2026.

Darren Jones Portrait The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Darren Jones)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

As I have outlined previously, work is ongoing across Departments to identify the material relevant to the Humble Address. Throughout this process, the Government have recognised the urgency and seriousness of fully complying with that Humble Address, and that is why we will publish relevant materials in tranches, the first of which we have committed to publishing in early March.

Gregory Stafford Portrait Gregory Stafford
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

Can the Minister confirm whether the head of the Government’s propriety and ethics team was appointed without an external recruitment process or written ministerial sign-off, in an apparent breach of its own rules? If so, is this further proof of a lack of transparency and accountability, and of a failure to uphold the propriety and ethics at the heart of this Government?

--- Later in debate ---
Gregory Stafford Portrait Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

A few moments ago, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster indicated to me that the appointment of the head of the propriety and ethics team was done by an external recruitment process. Will he tell me how many other people were interviewed?

Darren Jones Portrait Darren Jones
- View Speech - Hansard - -

If the hon. Gentleman is making reference to his previous question, he asked me if the appointment was in breach of the rules, to which I said no. As I have said to the House in answer to previous questions, the appointment of the head of propriety and ethics is on an interim basis, which is fully in line with the rules. A proper recruitment process will take place shortly.

Standards in Public Life

Debate between Darren Jones and Gregory Stafford
Monday 9th February 2026

(1 month, 2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Darren Jones Portrait Darren Jones
- View Speech - Hansard - -

It is important that we take good practice wherever it exists and learn the lessons where reforms have not worked, whether it is in our Parliament or in devolved Governments across the United Kingdom. I encourage the right hon. Gentleman to write to me with his examples in more detail to ensure that we avoid that in the future. I assure him that the Government have no intention or desire to try to limit the voices of people in this House or anywhere else.

Gregory Stafford Portrait Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

Let me go back to the process that the Prime Minister followed. He received information from the vetting and security services that Peter Mandelson might have had an ongoing relationship. He then questioned Peter Mandelson about that. Did he then test the answers that Peter Mandelson gave with the vetting and security service? If he did not, it can mean only one of two things: either the Prime Minister has committed a dereliction of duty or he is a credulous fool. Either way, should he not resign?