The right hon. and learned Gentleman anticipates my new clause 6, which will be discussed when we reach clause 10, and I entirely agree with what he says. New clause 11 is slightly fuller than new clause 5 because it also deals with the burden of proof. I understand that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is minded to accept, in principle, that I am on the right lines here, but I hope that when he replies he will make clear which of this shopping list of very basic procedural minimum requirements he does not agree with. He should do so if he wishes me not to pursue this matter, but to allow it to be dealt with in the other place. I cannot see which of my proposals anyone who is expecting a fair hearing could object to. If we are to consider turning our procedures to the outside world and having independent investigation, we should apply to ourselves the same standards as we would expect any other professional disciplinary body to apply in the outside world, be it one relating to doctors, lawyers or anybody else. We should not be treated any differently, fair standards of hearing are essential, and my proposals set out what those require.
Parliamentary Standards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Andrew Dismore
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 1 July 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Parliamentary Standards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
495 c318 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:23:19 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572827
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572827
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_572827