Martin Linton, chair of Labour Friends of Palestine
The election campaign took a distinctly unpleasant turn last week as pro-Palestinian MPs suggested the “Israel lobby” would play a behind-the-scenes role in key constituencies.
Martin Linton, chair of Labour Friends of Palestine, told a meeting at the House of Commons held by the Palestine Solidarity
Campaign and Friends of al-Aqsa: “There are long tentacles of Israel in this country who are funding election campaigns and putting money into the British political system for their own ends.
“You must consider over the next few weeks, when you make decisions about how you vote and how you advise constituents to vote, you must make them aware of the attempt by Israelis and by pro-Israelis to influence the election.”
Mr Linton sits on a tiny 163-vote majority in the London seat of Battersea and is unlikely to survive the election.
The veteran Jewish anti-Zionist MP Sir Gerald Kaufman suggested wealthy members of the community would play a role similar to that of Tory “non-dom” peer Michael Ashcroft. “Just as Lord Ashcroft owns most of the Conservative Party, right-wing Jewish millionaires own the rest,” he said.
Community Security Trust spokesman Mark Gardner said: “Anybody who understands antisemitism will recognise just how ugly and objectionable these quotes are, with their imagery of Jewish control and money power. Ask the average voter who had made these comments, and they would most likely answer that it was the BNP, not a pair of Labour MPs.”
A main concern for the Jewish community will be the threat of the BNP.
The two key target constituencies for the BNP are Barking, where the party’s leader Nick Griffin will stand against Jewish culture minister Margaret Hodge, and East Renfrewshire in Glasgow, where the Scottish BNP leader Gary Raikes will take on Secretary of State for Scotland, Jim Murphy. East Renfrewshire contains Scotland’s largest Jewish community.
Where the BNP is strongest, in parts of the north of England and in east London, the Jewish vote itself will make little difference. However, there are a handful of marginal constituencies where the size of the Jewish communities could make all the difference.
It is very unlikely that Labour can hold on to Margaret Thatcher’s old seat of Finchley and Golders Green, where the incumbent Rudi Vis is standing down and Tory leader of Barnet Council Mike Freer is confident of victory.
In neighbouring Hendon, Andrew Dismore has been a consistent champion of the concerns of the local Jewish community. But after a series of allegations about his expenses, he faces a tough fight with the Tories’ Matthew Offord and Matthew Harris, secretary of Lib Dem Friends of Israel.
One of the most intriguing battles will be for the Bury South seat of Middle East minister Ivan Lewis, a former chair of Manchester Jewish Federation. Although Mr Lewis sits on a substantial majority, he faces a formidable opponent in Michelle Wiseman, Chief Executive of Manchester Jewish Care.
Telegraph View: Expelled Israeli understood to be the Mossad head of station.
Whenever the British Government feels compelled to order a diplomatic expulsion, it is normally because a hostile foreign power, such as Russia, has been caught indulging in activity that threatens our national interests. It is, therefore, deeply regrettable that David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, yesterday ordered the withdrawal of a senior diplomat serving at the Israeli Embassy in London.
The decision to expel the Israeli – understood to be the Mossad head of station – was taken following an investigation by the Serious and Organised Crime Agency into allegations that the Israeli secret service had used forged British passports for its operation to assassinate Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, a senior Hamas commander, in his Dubai hotel room in January. Although the investigation could not prove unequivocally that Mossad was responsible, there was sufficient evidence to conclude that the passports had been forged by Israel, which was culpable, in the words of Mr Miliband, of a “profound disregard for the sovereignty of the UK”. This was compounded by the fact that the offence was committed by a country that is supposed to be our ally.
While few will mourn the death of al-Mabhouh, who was wanted in Israel for the abduction and murder of two Israeli soldiers, there are many reasons to be concerned about a diplomatic rift between Britain and Israel. The two countries have co-operated closely on a number of important global security issues, particularly the potential threat posed by Iran’s illicit nuclear programme. Good relations between Israel and the West are essential if any significant progress is to be made in negotiating a lasting peace deal with the Palestinians. Israel should acknowledge Britain’s justifiable anger and reflect on its priorities.
But the prospects for the resumption of normal diplomatic discourse appear remote so long as Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, is intent on adopting a confrontational attitude towards his allies. During his visit to Washington this week Mr Netanyahu has been unrepentant about his government’s decision to press ahead with building more settler homes in Jerusalem, even though the announcement provoked an angry response from the Obama administration. Mr Netanyahu’s critics in Israel, moreover, claim he has deliberately embarked on this course of action because he has no intention of making peace with the Palestinians. If that is the case, then Israel risks isolating itself even further – and that is not in the interests of the West and can only diminish the prospects of a lasting settlement.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/7507392/David-Milibands-regrettable-expulsion-of-Israeli-diplomat.html, 23 Mar 2010
A BBC investigation has revealed that more than 20 MPs have breached rules in relation to registering and declaring overseas trips paid for by foreign governments.
The trips taken by Andrew Dismore, his relevant parliamentary activities and his detailed replies to the BBC are below.
Since 2001, Mr Dismore has been a member of the Standards and Privileges Committee, whose role includes the scrutiny of the MPs’code of conduct.
He told the BBC that all his visits had been registered in time and in the appropriate manner, and that there was no breach of the rules on lobbying as overseas visits are excluded and his trips had been funded by the Republic of Cyprus Parliament and not the Republic of Cyprus Government.
Cyprus
Mr Dismore, the Labour MP for Hendon in north London, visited Cyprus in October 2005,October 2006,September 2007,November 2008 andOctober 2009, courtesy of the Municipality of Morphou and Cyprus House of Representatives.
Within a year of registration of these trips, Mr Dismore tabled 90 questions relating to Cyprus without declaring an interest.
They were: 31080, 48898, 72084, 95204, 95205, 96907 to 96915, 96917 to 96920, 96939 to 96941, 96958 to 96961, 96969, 96970, 96974, 96977 to 96979, 136661, 162758, 162759, 162769 to 162771, 162773, 162812, 162819 to 162822, 163110 to 163118, 163121 to 163134, 163213 to 163221, 163284, 163627, 163793 to 163798, 180049, 180051, 180052, 180056, 245049, 252915 and 293708.
Mr Dismore also asked a further 112 questions relating to Cyprus where an interest was declared.
They were: 245029, 245050 to 245061, 245158 to 245174, 245180 to 245182, 245190 to 245199, 245217 to 245224, 252877 to 252881, 252884, 293650, 293696 to 293707, 293709 to 293744, 295162, 312737 to 312739, and 312838 to 312840.
The BBC put to Mr Dismore that asking ministers a total of 202 questions following visits to Cyprus – whether an interest was declared or not – might be perceived as lobbying on behalf of an overseas power from whom hospitality has recently been received. This would constitute a very serious breach of parliamentary rules.
In addition to those questions, Mr Dismore tabled a debate on Cyprus on 8 November 2005. Records of the summary agenda, the order paper and weekly bulletin indicate that he did not declare an interest. Whenever an interest is declared, the symbol “[R]” appears on the relevant notice or order papers.
However, Mr Dismore did declare an interest at the start of the debate.
During the debate, Mr Dismoresaid: “What is to be done immediately? Some things are relatively easy. Earlier, I mentioned the need to find finance to deal with the issue of missing persons.
“Two million Cyprus pounds is not too much for the UK to find, either on its own or with its partners.”
Similarly, Mr Dismore tabled adebate on Cyprus on 10 January 2007. Records of the summary agenda, the order paper and weekly bulletin indicate that he did not declare an interest. However, Mr Dismore did declare an interest at the start of the debate.
Mr Dismore secured a third debate about Cyprus on 15 January 2009. Again, no declaration of interest is recorded in the weekly bulletin,the summary agenda or the order paper. However, Mr Dismore did declare an interest at the start of the debate.
During the debate, Mr Dismore said: “The Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus is working well and is not politicised by either side. I visited the laboratory for the second time and was very impressed by the progress that is being made.
“There have been 466 exhumations so far and 110 sets of remains have been returned – 78 to Greek Cypriots and 32 to Turkish Cypriots. The annual budget for the committee and its work is $3m a year.
“In the three years from 2004 to 2007, we donated £160,000. We ought to consider further payments because the committee needs those extra bilateral donations.
“Demining is also important for confidence building. The United Nations Development Programme has cleared 51 minefields. That has largely been funded by the EU but there is a 5m euro shortfall.
“That money will be needed to clear the rest of the zone, and the UN says that it could do it if it had the money. We could help by making a donation towards that. The buffer zone occupies 3% of the land.
“If that land could be liberated from the mines and from that part of the process, it would be available for civilian use, which could help towards a settlement.”
Mr Dismore secured a further debate about Cyprus on 10 November 2009 but again did not declare an interest on the weekly bulletin, thesummary agenda or the order paper. However, Mr Dismore did declare an interest at the start of the debate.
During the debate, Mr Dismore said: “The UN Committee on Missing Persons continues its work, although there is a significant backlog in its anthropological laboratory on the piecing together of the various remains.
“Nonetheless, the committee told us that it was not really practical to expand the operation. Altogether the bicommunal teams have exhumed 570 sets of remains from both sides of the green line and returned the remains of 179 people to their families – 135 Greek Cypriots and 44 Turkish Cypriots.
“They are perennially in the hunt for money, requiring between 2.2m euro and 2.4m euro a year to function. The EU has just given the teams 2m euro for the next two years, but they are still 1m euro short for next year.
“Since the committee started its work many years ago, the UK has given it $159,000, but it is a long time since we last gave it a grant, and it is time that we gave it another one.”
Later in the debate, he said: “I hope that the minister will be able to find a little cash in the Foreign Office budget to provide the initiatives that I mentioned with at least token support, if not more substantive support.”
Further to these debates, on 18 December 2008, during a debate on Human Rights Mr Dismore spoke about Cyprus.
After declaring an interest, he said: “On a positive note, the Committee on Missing Persons, which is part of the United Nations – my Hon Friend the Member for Ilford, South referred to the United Nations in his opening remarks – is functioning well, but it cannot look at the cause of death or attribute responsibility.
“It is working on a bicommunal basis, which is one of the positive things in Cyprus. It has exhumed 450 bodies so far, out of a total of 1,996 missing people on both sides.
“It has been able to identify and return 107 sets of remains – 31 Turkish Cypriots and 76 Greek Cypriots – and investigated 224 sites. It needs $3m to run, and is funded year by year only.
“Does my Hon Friend the Minister think that the Government will consider putting their hand in their pocket to ensure that such vital work continues, because it has at least another two years’ worth of work to do?
“In relation to demining, to which both reports referred, another 4m euro is needed to clear the rest of the buffer zone. Both communities and the UN have put money into demining, but it remains a significant problem to conclude. I hope that the minister can respond to those important human rights points.”
The MPs’ code of conduct states that: “Members may not, for example, advocate in debate increased United Kingdom financial assistance to a government from which they have recently received hospitality.
“Nor may any Member advocate any other measure for the exclusive benefit of the host government.”
The BBC has put to Mr Dismore that some of his statements might be perceived as lobbying on behalf of an overseas power from whom hospitality has recently been received – a very serious breach of parliamentary rules.
Following visits to Cyprus, Mr Dismore also have signed 24 early day motions relating to the island. In the following three cases he did not declare an interest:
1. MR GEORGE IACOVOU / 12.12.2006 / EDM 474
2. SOTERIS GEORGALLIS / 16.04.2007 / EDM 1273 (of which he was the Primary Sponsor)
In response to the points put to him by the BBC Mr Dismore said he had declared an interest before debates and added: “There is no question of my having broken any rule in relation to lobbying, as overseas visits are excluded and I did not lobby for funding for the Cyprus government or Cyprus parliament.”
Mr Dismore said the hosts of his visits to Cyprus were the Cyprus House of Representatives and the Municipality of Morphou, and not the government of Cyrpus.
Mr Dismore denied that advocating increased financial assistance to the United Nations Committee for Missing Persons in Cyprus could be perceived as lobbying or amount to a breach of the rules.
Reply on early day motions
Mr Dismore said that the issue with EDMs (early day motions) was one of relevance. “As you rightly report, I declared an interest in relation to 24 early day motions. The other three were so remote, I did not believe that I had an interest warranting declaration.”
Reply on the written questions
Mr Dismore said that it was not possible for him to check if he had registered an interest in respect of the written questions, due to the way records are kept in Parliament.
“Accordingly, although I cannot confirm or deny that I registered an interest in relation to those questions, I do not believe that there was an interest to register in relation to them. ”
Responding to the large number of questions asked, 200 over a five-year period, Mr Dismore said an average of 40 to 50 questions a year was not excessive on an issue in which an MP has a speciality.
He added: “I normally ask several hundred questions a year on many different issues in which I take an interest relevant to my parliamentary work and constituency, and to that extent the number of questions over five years relating to Cyprus should be seen in that context.”
Mr Dismore also said that he had declared an interest at the start of each adjournment debate.
Catherine Philp, Diplomatic Correspondent, and James Hider in Jerusalem
A serious rift in relations between Britain and Israel opened yesterday after a criminal investigation uncovered “compelling” evidence that Jerusalem had cloned the UK passports used in the assassination of a senior Hamas operative in Dubai.
Britain responded by expelling a senior Israeli diplomat, believed to be the Mossad station chief in London; imposing new travel advice, warning Britons of the threat of state-sponsored identity theft in Israel; and demanding a public assurance that Israel would never misuse British passports again.
Israel’s Ambassador expressed his disappointment but said he was determined to “strengthen the firm foundations” of the relationship between Britain and Israel. The froideur only increased, however, when it emerged that David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, had cancelled his scheduled attendance at a reception marking the renovation of the Israeli Embassy yesterday.
Instead, Mr Miliband told the Commons of the conclusion of the investigation by the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca) and denounced Israel’s behaviour as “intolerable” and displaying a “profound disregard for the sovereignty of the United Kingdom”.
“The fact that this was done by a country which is a friend, with significant diplomatic, cultural, business and personal ties to the UK, only adds insult to injury,” he added. He said he had demanded a formal assurance that the fraud would not recur from Avigdor Liebermann, the Israeli Foreign Minister. The travel advice to be issued to British citizens would depend on the answer that he received.
Diplomatic sources told The Times that the assurance would have to be public — in effect, forcing Israel to admit its involvement in the fraud and, by implication, in the assassination of Mahmud al-Mabhuh on January 19.
Suspicions fell on Israel’s intelligence agency immediately after the killing, but they were reinforced when it emerged that all of the Western passport holders whose identities were used were also Israeli nationals. Mr Miliband said that Soca investigation had lead directly back to Israel and that no other country appeared to have been involved.
“Given that this was a very sophisticated operation, in which high-quality forgeries were made, the Government judges it is highly likely that the forgeries were made by a state intelligence service,” he said. “Taking this, together with other inquiries, we have concluded that there are compelling reasons to believe that Israel was responsible for the misuse of the British passports.”
The passports of Irish, German, French and Australian citizens were also used but those countries are yet to conclude their investigations.
Israel said that it regretted the British move to expel the Mossad representative but, while the Government in Jerusalem was measured in its response, , MPs from the far Right denounced the British as untrustworthy “dogs”.
“I think the British are behaving hypocritically,” Aryeh Eldad, of the National Union, an ultra-nationalist, pro-settler party, told Sky News. “Who are they to judge us on the war on terror?”
Michael Ben Ari, another National Union MP, said: “The British are dogs but they are not loyal to us . This is anti-Semitism disguised as anti-Zionism”.
Hundreds of breaches of parliamentary rules by MPs who accepted free overseas trips from foreign governments have been uncovered by a BBC investigation.
More than 20 MPs broke rules on declaring hospitality in questions or debates after visiting locations such as the Maldives, Cyprus and Gibraltar.
The MPs – from Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems – breached parliamentary regulations on more than 400 occasions.
One former standards watchdog says it shows MPs cannot regulate themselves.
Some MPs dismissed the breaches as technical errors or oversights.
However, the former Commissioner for Standards in Public Life, Sir Alistair Graham, told the BBC repeated rule breaches threatened to “undermine the integrity” of the democratic system.
He said it “demonstrated the failure of the self-regulating system”, adding: “This is a very worrying situation which will further demean the standing of Parliament.”
Conservative leader David Cameron said: “The Parliamentary Standards Commissioner must get to the bottom of what’s happened in every case and we must look at the penalties that apply when rules like this are broken.”
He said the self-regulating system was “at the heart of the problem” and that it might be necessary to change its structure.
Mr Cameron added that a system of imposing automatic fixed penalties on MPs who break rules might be appropriate.
The rules on overseas visits are there to ensure that no-one can accuse MPs of accepting foreign hospitality in return for political favours, for example pressing the UK government for financial assistance.
They require MPs to register such visits and then declare relevant trips in questions, motions or debates.
One of those who appears to have fallen foul of the code of conduct is Labour’s Andrew Dismore, a member of the Commons Standards and Privileges Committee – the very body which polices MPs’ behaviour.
He broke rules more than 90 times, following annual visits to Cyprus, by failing to declare the hospitality when raising issues about the island in Parliament.
In total, he has tabled more than 200 Commons questions about Cyprus since the last election in 2005, on topics such as missing persons from the island and its victims of past conflict between Turkey and Greece.
The Commons information office estimates it costs on average £149 to answer a written question.
Mr Dismore has also signed motions and led debates about Cyprus. However, he denies any wrongdoing and claims his questions about Cyprus were not sufficiently relevant to his trips to require a declaration.
Conservative David Amess has admitted failing to register a free trip to the Maldives – regarded as a “very serious” breach of the rules by the Committee on Standards and Privileges, according to the MPs’ code of conduct.
He also accepts he did not register a second trip for almost a year, blaming an administrative error by his office staff.
‘Paradise’
During a debate he tabled about the Maldives in 2007, Mr Amess told the Commons how his “splendid visit” had given him “an early taste of paradise”.
“No words can describe adequately just how beautiful the islands are,” he added, before suggesting the UK Government “could be encouraged to do a little more than is being done at the moment” for the islands in the Indian Ocean.
Despite leading two debates about UK support for the Maldives and asking 15 questions about the islands, he failed to declare an interest. Referring to the MPs’ code of conduct, Mr Amess told the BBC: “It is for the member to judge whether a financial interest is sufficiently relevant.”
Liberal Democrat Norman Baker, who has been actively calling for a clean-up of Parliament following the expenses scandal, has admitted breaching the rules on 37 occasions.
In a statement to the BBC, Mr Baker accepts he failed to declare an interest when leading debates and tabling questions about topics such as human rights in Tibet. He has travelled to India twice, courtesy of the Tibet Society and the Tibet government-in-exile.
“I should have then declared a relevant interest in respect of the parliamentary activities you list,” he said. “It is an unintended oversight that I did not.”
The MP who heads the Commons Public Administration Select Committee, Tony Wright, told the BBC that such rule-breaking was “unacceptable” and that the system should be more transparent.
“Declarations should be the norm. It is quite proper for MPs to go on visits. Some of those visits will be financed by foreign governments. But… if they’re lobbying on behalf of governments who have paid for their visits, then clearly we need to know about it.”
The rules are enforced by MPs themselves. Breaches are only investigated if a formal complaint is made and there is no independent body to ensure that members stick to the regulations.
Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox has admitted breaking the rules on two occasions, having visited Sri Lanka five times in the past three years courtesy of its government. He failed to declare the hospitality when asking ministers how much UK aid had been given to Sri Lanka.
In a statement, Mr Fox said: “I should have noted an interest and will be writing to the registrar to make this clear.” He blamed a “changeover of staffing responsibilities” for registering one of his visits more than two months late.
During the current Parliament, Gibraltar’s government has funded 31 trips for MPs to attend an annual street party on the territory.
Street party
Labour’s Lindsay Hoyle has been a guest at these National Day Celebrations three times. Following his visits he has asked 30 questions, tabled three early day motions and signed a further seven, all without declaring his interest.
Mr Hoyle also broke the rules by failing to declare an interest following registered trips to the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands.
“I have never received or sought any financial benefit,” he told the BBC.
Conservative Andrew Rosindell has been a guest of Gibraltar’s government twice in recent years. He subsequently asked 48 questions and signed or sponsored nine motions related to the territory without declaring an interest.
Thirteen of his questions about Gibraltar were before a visit had been registered. The BBC put the matters to Mr Rosindell but has yet to receive a response.
The BBC has identified a further 10 MPs from all three major parties who have been guests of Gibraltar’s government and shortly afterwards breached rules when signing motions or tabling questions about the territory.
The investigation has also identified three more Labour MPs and another Conservative who failed to declare an interest following visits to Cyprus.
Cabinet ministers rounded on their former colleagues, including Stephen Byers, Patricia Hewitt and Geoff Hoon, who were caught trying to sell their influence for cash.
Cabinet members have vowed to tighten up lobbying laws
Related Tags:
Geoff Hoon
Patricia Hewitt
David Miliband
ministers
secretary
They vowed to tighten up lobbying laws after MPs including Stephen Byers, Patricia Hewitt and Geoff Hoon were secretly filmed talking to undercover reporters.
‘There is absolutely no room for the sort of innuendo or promises that seem to have been floated in this case,’ said foreign secretary David Miliband.
Chancellor Alistair Darling sugges ted the MPs had been naive to fall for the sting targeting 20 MPs standing down at the next general election.
‘Really, what on earth did they think they were doing?’ he said.
‘The best answer when you get a call like that is to put the receiver back down again – it’s obvious.’
In the footage for Channel 4’s Dispatches programme, former transport secretary Mr Byers described himself as ‘like a sort of cab for hire’ – charging £5,000 a day to pull the strings of movers and shakers. He also claimed to have influenced Lord Adonis in his dealings with National Express.
Former health secretary Ms Hewitt allegedly said she had helped a client paying her £3,000 a day to win a seat on a government advisory group.
And ex-defence secretary Geoff Hoon is said to have offered introductions to current ministers, in return for fees of £5,000 a day.
Mr Byers last night insisted he had ‘never lobbied ministers on behalf of commercial organisations’. He said he had made ‘exaggerated claims’ in the discussions caught on camera.
, 21st March, 2010
[2]
Calls for inquiry into ‘MPs for hire’ scandal
Damian Whitworth, Francis Elliott and Alex Ralph
David Cameron demanded yesterday that Gordon Brown investigate a boast by the former Cabinet minister Stephen Byers that he had used his influence to change policies to favour businesses.
The former Transport Secretary [Lord Adonis], who was secretly filmed offering himself “like a sort of cab for hire” for up to £5,000 a day, will be referred to the parliamentary standards watchdog today.
Mr Byers told an undercover reporter that he had secured secret deals with ministers and said that he received confidential information from No 10 and was able to help firms involved in price fixing to get around the law.
The claims gravely embarrassed Labour, which rushed forward a promise to introduce a compulsory register of lobbying which it said had been planned for the election manifesto.
Thirteen Labour MPs and seven Tories were approached by investigators for Channel 4’s Dispatches and The Sunday Times, pretending to be executives from a fictitious American lobbying firm. The others to feature in the documentary to be screened tonight are Labour’s Geoff Hoon, Patricia Hewitt, Margaret Moran and Baroness Morgan and the Tory MP Sir John Butterfill, who is understood to have boasted about his closeness to Mr Cameron.
Mr Byers was covertly filmed telling the reporter that he would be able to lobby ministers and gave examples of where he had done so before. He said he would charge £3,000-£5,000 a day and claimed he had done a deal with Lord Adonis, the Transport Secretary, to benefit National Express. He later retracted his claims and he, Lord Adonis and National Express all strongly denied any deal yesterday.
All of the MPs filmed, including Ms Hewitt and Mr Hoon, former Cabinet ministers, denied any wrongdoing and insisted that they had breached no rules. “I am confident that any investigation from the Standards Commissioner will confirm that I have always fully complied with the MPs’ code of conduct,” Mr Byers said. “I have never lobbied ministers on behalf of commercial organisations and have always fully disclosed my outside interests.”
Mr Hoon, a former Defence Secretary, reportedly said that he charged £3,000 a day and was looking to turn his knowledge and contacts into “something that frankly makes money”. He said: “At no stage did I offer, nor would I attempt to, sell confidential or privileged information arising from my time in government.”
Ms Hewitt said she “completely rejected” the allegation that she helped to obtain a key seat on a government advisory group for a client paying £3,000 a day.
The Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats said they would table parliamentary questions about the claims in an attempt to see if there had been breaches of the ministerial code.
“I have been warning for some time that lobbying is the next scandal to hit British politics,” Mr Cameron said. “These are shocking allegations. The House of Commons needs to conduct a thorough investigation into these ex-Labour ministers.”
He said that the Prime Minister “would want to get to the bottom of the accusations being made about his Government — and real change is needed”.
Senior Cabinet ministers distanced themselves from their former colleagues.
Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, said it was “ridiculous” that the MPs had been caught out in the sting. “The best answer when you get a call like that is to put the receiver back down again. There are rules about serving MPs — we’ve said that we are going to have to get a statutory-backed code of conduct to deal with former ministers. But really, what on earth did they think they were doing?”
David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, said that he was “appalled” and added: “There is absolutely no room for anyone to trade on their ministerial office.”
Research by The Times shows eight former ministers have made up to £370,000 in outside work of various kinds since announcing they would be stepping down as MPs. They include John Prescott, John Reid, John Hutton, Alan Milburn and Ms Hewitt. Mr Prescott, former Deputy Prime Minister, has made up to £166,000, mostly through television documentaries and his autobiography.
, March 22, 2010
[3]
[4]
MPs’ foreign visit rules breached
Hundreds of breaches of parliamentary rules by MPs who accepted free overseas trips from foreign governments have been uncovered by a BBC investigation.
More than 20 MPs broke rules on declaring hospitality in questions or debates after visiting locations such as the Maldives, Cyprus and Gibraltar.
Between them, the MPs – from all the major parties – breached parliamentary regulations on more than 400 occasions.
One former standards watchdog says it shows MPs cannot regulate themselves.
Some MPs dismissed the breaches as technical errors or oversights.
However, the former Commissioner for Standards in Public Life, Sir Alistair Graham, told the BBC repeated rule breaches threatened to “undermine the integrity” of the democratic system.
He said it “demonstrated the failure of the self-regulating system of discipline in the Commons” and called for a shake-up of the way MPs’ behaviour is monitored.
“This is a very worrying situation which will further demean the standing of Parliament,” he said.
BBC home editor Mark Easton, who led the investigation, said it would raise further questions about the Commons’ ability to regulate itself.
The rules on overseas visits are there to ensure that no-one can accuse MPs of accepting foreign hospitality in return for political favours, for example pressing the UK government for financial assistance.
They require MPs to register such visits and then declare relevant trips in questions, motions or debates.
One of those who appears to have fallen foul of the code of conduct is Labour’s Andrew Dismore, a member ofthe Commons Standards and Privileges Committee – the very body which polices MPs’ behaviour.
He broke rules more than 90 times, following annual visits to Cyprus, by failing to declare the hospitality when raising issues about the island in Parliament.
In total, he has tabled more than 200 Commons questions about Cyprus since the last election in 2005, on topics such as missing persons from the island and its victims of past conflict between Turkey and Greece.
The Commons information office estimates it costs on average £149 to answer a written question.
Mr Dismore has also signed motions and led debates about Cyprus. However, he denies any wrongdoing and claims his questions about Cyprus were not sufficiently relevant to his trips to require a declaration.
Conservative David Amess has admitted failing to register a free trip to the Maldives – regarded as a “very serious” breach of the rules by the Committee on Standards and Privileges, according to the MPs’ code of conduct.
He also accepts he did not register a second trip for almost a year, blaming an administrative error by his office staff.
‘Paradise’
During a debate he tabled about the Maldives in 2007, Mr Amess told the Commons how his “splendid visit” had given him “an early taste of paradise”.
“No words can describe adequately just how beautiful the islands are,” he added, before suggesting the UK Government “could be encouraged to do a little more than is being done at the moment” for the islands in the Indian Ocean.
Despite leading two debates about UK support for the Maldives and asking 15 questions about the islands, he failed to declare an interest. Referring to the MPs’ code of conduct, Mr Amess told the BBC: “It is for the member to judge whether a financial interest is sufficiently relevant.”
Liberal Democrat Norman Baker, who has been actively calling for a clean-up of Parliament following the expenses scandal, has admitted breaching the rules on 37 occasions.
In a statement to the BBC, Mr Baker accepts he failed to declare an interest when leading debates and tabling questions about topics such as human rights in Tibet. He has travelled to India twice, courtesy of the Tibet Society and the Tibet government-in-exile.
“I should have then declared a relevant interest in respect of the parliamentary activities you list,” he said. “It is an unintended oversight that I did not.”
The MP who heads the Commons Public Administration Select Committee, Tony Wright, told the BBC that such rule-breaking was “unacceptable” and that the system should be more transparent.
“Declarations should be the norm. It is quite proper for MPs to go on visits. Some of those visits will be financed by foreign governments. But… if they’re lobbying on behalf of governments who have paid for their visits, then clearly we need to know about it.”
The rules are enforced by MPs themselves. Breaches are only investigated if a formal complaint is made and there is no independent body to ensure that members stick to the regulations.
Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox has admitted breaking the rules on two occasions, having visited Sri Lanka five times in the past three years courtesy of its government. He failed to declare the hospitality when asking ministers how much UK aid had been given to Sri Lanka.
In a statement, Mr Fox said: “I should have noted an interest and will be writing to the registrar to make this clear.” He blamed a “changeover of staffing responsibilities” for registering one of his visits more than two months late.
During the current Parliament, Gibraltar’s government has funded 31 trips for MPs to attend an annual street party on the territory.
Street party
Labour’s Lindsay Hoyle has been a guest at these National Day Celebrations three times. Following his visits he has asked 30 questions, tabled three early day motions and signed a further seven, all without declaring his interest.
Mr Hoyle also broke the rules by failing to declare an interest following registered trips to the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands.
“I have never received or sought any financial benefit,” he told the BBC.
Conservative Andrew Rosindell has been a guest of Gibraltar’s government twice in recent years. He subsequently asked 48 questions and signed or sponsored nine motions related to the territory without declaring an interest.
Thirteen of his questions about Gibraltar were before a visit had been registered. The BBC put the matters to Mr Rosindell but has yet to receive a response.
The BBC has identified a further 10 MPs from all three major parties who have been guests of Gibraltar’s government and shortly afterwards breached rules when signing motions or tabling questions about the territory.
The investigation has also identified three more Labour MPs and another Conservative who failed to declare an interest following visits to Cyprus.
MPs who have breached the rules:
David Amess
Norman Baker
Crispin Blunt
Graham Brady
Colin Breed
David Burrowes
Andrew Dismore
Jim Dobbin
Alan Duncan
Liam Fox
Mike Hancock
Lindsay Hoyle
Paul Keetch
Bob Laxton
David Lepper
Andrew Love
Madeline Moon
Mike Penning
Andrew Rosindell
Richard Spring
Theresa Villiers
Rudi Vis
DECLARING FOREIGN TRIPS
Any MP who has an overseas trip paid for by a foreign government must register it within four weeks
They must declare a financial interest if it “might reasonably be thought by others to influence the speech, representation or communication in question”
This includes when tabling questions, motions, bills or amendments, and when speaking out during Commons proceedings
Members may not, for example, call for increased UK financial assistance to the government which provided the hospitality
Q&A – MPs’ foreign trips rules
ANALYSIS
By Mark Easton, BBC home editor
The point of the regulations is to ensure that a sceptical citizenry can be confident about the integrity of their elected representatives.
Transparency is key.
The whole system only works if members take this responsibility seriously. Declaration doesn’t imply wrongdoing, but a failure to declare might be interpreted that way.
The widespread abuse of the system uncovered by our investigation suggests some Members of Parliament don’t understand this.
But what really struck me as I conducted the investigation is that the system of scrutiny surrounding the rules clearly does not work.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8580183.stm, 22 March 2010
By Mark Easton, BBC home editor