Recall of MPs Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Cabinet Office

Recall of MPs Bill

Stephen Phillips Excerpts
Monday 27th October 2014

(9 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Bill seeks to address those significant gaps in the framework while maintaining the balance between dealing with wrongdoing and an MP’s ability to speak their mind.
Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)
- Hansard - -

As I understand the Bill, it proposes that in the event of a custodial sentence of less than 12 months the recall mechanism can be triggered. Many offences are punished not by custodial sentences but by serious community penalties. Why have the Government taken the view that offences punished by such sentences should not trigger the ability to recall the Member?

Sam Gyimah Portrait Mr Gyimah
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I must correct my hon. and learned Friend on a point of detail. Recall would—not can—be triggered if a Member received a custodial sentence of less than 12 months. What drives the Government’s recall process is the level of seriousness. So, for example, a fine for non-payment of the television licence is not in the same category as serious assault or theft. However, a community sentence that brought the House into disrepute or for conduct in breach of the Members code of conduct could trigger the second recall petition under which the Member may be suspended for 21 days at the recommendation of the Standards Committee. That could result in recall and a by-election if the 10% threshold was reached.

Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips
- Hansard - -

The Minister is right: that could trigger the Standards Committee to act, but it might not. Is not the difficulty that it looks again as though the House is seeking to regulate itself rather than hand power to our constituents?

Sam Gyimah Portrait Mr Gyimah
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We are looking at the operation of the Standards Committee and how it can be strengthened, as the Minister of State, Cabinet Office, my right hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells said earlier. I assure my hon. and learned Friend that, even under the current terms of the Bill, if a Member is reported to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, it would have to investigate. If the Member has breached the code of conduct, the Standards Committee can make a recommendation to the House of a suspension for 21 days, and that could trigger a recall petition. So a Member receiving a non-custodial sentence could still face recall.

Amendment 1 deals with the point that recall could be triggered over and over again. New clause 2 concerns the 200-word statement by the promoter of the recall petition. That makes sense if someone brings a recall petition against a Member under the scheme proposed by my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park—they should be able to put their accusations on paper and the Member should have the right of reply—but it risks accusations that are unfounded getting into the public domain and being given credence because they have been distributed by the local authority. Damage to the Member’s reputation could be done just by allowing people to promote their reasons for recall.