Parliamentary Standards Bill

I am grateful to the noble Lord for making that intervention. As we introduced the Bill, the IPSA’s functions were limited to giving a direction or recommendation. Even in those circumstances, though, enforcement was to be a matter for the House in the exercise of its current conduct and discipline functions. Much of our debate today has been about whether the House of Commons’s conduct and discipline functions are as fair as the noble Lord thinks they ought to be. Subsequent to the Bill’s original publication, though, we have had two amendments that have changed the way in which the IPSA and the commissioner operate. First, IPSA is no longer to have any recommendation or direction functions. The commissioner is only to report findings to the House of Commons Committee on Standards and Privileges. That means that the commissioner would not be involved in determining civil rights or obligations for the purposes of Article 6. In addition, although the Government are not convinced by the JCHR’s arguments concerning ECHR, we have none the less decided to accept the key safeguards from Amendment 49. Government Amendment 53B sets out that the procedure for commissioner investigations must include an opportunity for the MP to be heard in person, and an opportunity, where the commissioner considers it appropriate, to call and examine witnesses. My understanding is that that reflects the procedural safeguards which exist in Standing Order 150 of the other place, where the parliamentary commissioner for standards makes use of an investigatory panel to assist him. That ought to go some way to reassuring the noble Lord. My noble friend Lord Campbell-Savours and the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, have raised concerns about how the Committee on Standards and Privileges conducts its affairs; it is only right and proper for noble Lords to do so. At the end of the day, however, that is very much a matter for the other place to regulate. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, that it is part of that House’s internal disciplinary proceedings. While I am happy to ensure that this debate is referred to appropriate Members in the other place, I am hesitant to go down the route of our determining what ought to happen.