from BBC NEWS
Lord Sewel has resigned from the House of Lords after being filmed by the Sun on Sunday allegedly taking cocaine at his London flat, in the company of prostitutes. Before he decided to resign, his case focused attention on the rules for expelling peers.
John Buttifant Sewel, 69, was awarded a peerage in 1996, after a long career in higher education. He worked at Aberdeen University for more than 30 years, firstly as an academic and then as vice-principal between 1995 and 1997 and 1999 and 2004.
He was a Labour councillor for many years, leading Aberdeen Council and heading the body which represents all Scottish authorities in the 1970s and 1980s.
As a junior Scottish Office minister in the government of Tony Blair, he helped steer legislation through the House of Lords which paved the way for a Scottish Parliament. As a result, his name was given to the so-called Sewel convention, which allows the UK Parliament to pass legislation on a devolved issue extending to Scotland, over which the Scottish Parliament has legislative authority.
He stood for the Scottish Parliament in its inaugural election in 1999 but was not successful. He is also a member of the Nato parliamentary assembly, attended by politicians from the defence alliance's 28 members.
What role did he have in the Lords?
After stepping down as a minister in 1999, Lord Sewel remained active in the House of Lords, serving on a host of committees, including those overseeing procedures.
He also chaired the privileges and conduct committee, which rules on disciplinary matters and can recommend the suspension of peers.
In 2012, he was also elected as chairman of the committees, a job in which he oversaw the work of the Lords' various committees, and for which he was paid an £84,500 salary. As a result, he automatically became a deputy speaker of the Lords and resigned the Labour whip, becoming a crossbencher not formally affiliated to any party.
Following the Sun on Sunday expose, he resigned from all these formal posts. He has also been suspended as a member of the Labour Party. Sources on Monday told the BBC that Lord Sewel did not intend to stand down as a peer but after a day of mounting pressure, he resigned from the House of Lords on Tuesday morning.
Does he remain a Lord?
Yes. Though he is no longer a member of the House of Lords.
What did Lord Sewel's resignation statement say?
"I have today written to the Clerk of the Parliaments terminating my membership of the House of Lords. The question of whether my behaviour breached the Code of Conduct is important, but essentially technical. The bigger questions are whether my behaviour is compatible with membership of the House of Lords and whether my continued membership would damage and undermine public confidence in the House of Lords. I believe the answer to both these questions means that I can best serve the House by leaving it.
"As a subordinate, second chamber the House of Lords is an effective, vital but undervalued part of our political system. I hope my decision will limit and help repair the damage I have done to an institution I hold dear. Finally, I want to apologise for the pain and embarrassment I have caused."
Could Lord Sewel have been forced to quit?
Under new rules which came into force earlier this year, peers could theoretically be expelled if they are found to have breached the code of conduct that all members are expected to uphold.
The code requires members to act in the public interest, and in accordance with the seven general principles of conduct identified by the Committee on Standards in Public Life - selflessness; integrity; objectivity; accountability; openness; honesty and leadership.
No peer has yet been expelled and to pave the way for this, the Lords would merely need to change its standing orders - the rules which govern its business.
But there was a long way to go before we got to this point in this case. There would have needed to be an investigation by the Lords authorities - which was likely to take months and would not begin until any criminal proceedings were completed.
In the past, peers have been temporarily suspended for expenses fraud, lobbying scandals and other misconduct but have all ultimately returned to the House of Lords, while Lord Archer remained a peer after being jailed for perjury.
But since 2014, peers convicted of a crime carrying a prison sentence of more than a year are permanently barred from the Lords, as are those who do not attend Parliament for a year, although in both cases they get to retain their titles.
Peers are also able to step down or retire on other grounds, such as health, old age or other commitments. More than 25 peers, including a number of former cabinet ministers, have used this mechanism to exit the Lords this year.
In short the most likely way Lord Sewel was ever going to leavae the Lords was if decided to, as the phrase goes, "act upon his honour" and voluntarily quit.
What about the other investigations?
Lord Sewel is expected to face an investigation by the parliamentary commissioner for standards, Paul Kernaghan, after a formal complaint was made to him.
The former police officer will decide in the next 48 hours whether to look into the matter. Once any inquiry is concluded, it will be up to him to recommend a course of action and whether the peer should face sanctions. Although as Lord Sewel has now left the House of Lords it is not yet clear whether the inquiry will continue.
If it did it would then be up to the whole House of Lords - acting on the recommendation of the privileges committee - to decide what to do.
Baroness D'Souza, the Lords Speaker, also referred the matter to the police who launched a criminal investigation into "allegations of drug-related offences involving a member of the House of Lords".
What does this mean for the Lords?
Although few peers have commented on the episode, those that have have acknowledged that it has damaged the reputation of the Lords. Whether it prompts renewed calls for changes to the Upper Chamber remains to be seen.
Critics argue the Lords has become too big - it has nearly 800 active members - and that it is an affront to democracy that the vast majority of its members are appointed, not elected.
Attempts by the coalition government to move to a largely elected Lords foundered in 2012 amid opposition from peers as well as Conservative and Labour MPs. The issue is not currently a priority for the Conservative government.
In particular, there have been calls for the way peers are remunerated to be overhauled. Peers who are not ministers are not paid a salary but receive a flat-rate daily attendance allowance of £150 or £300.
In return, peers are expected to attend and contribute to debates and other proceedings in the House of Lords.
But there have been claims that some peers have been "clocking on" to receive the money without undertaking any substantial work in the Lords. One peer, Lord Hanningfield, was suspended for a year in 2014 for claiming allowances which he was not entitled to.
Supporters say the current system provides much better value for money than an elected Lords would and it also enables experts in various fields to participate in the legislative system without having to stand for election.
No comments:
Post a Comment