Written evidence from Independent Expert Panel (LAN0003)

The Independent Expert Panel (IEP) is established by the House of Commons under Standing Order No. 150A to:

• Hear appeals against decisions made by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards (the Commissioner), and considers referrals from the Commissioner and determines sanctions in cases involving an allegation against an MP of a breach of Parliament’s Sexual Misconduct Policy or the Bullying and Harassment policy, under the Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme; and
• Hears appeals against decisions by the Committee on Standards in cases involving an allegation against an MP of a breach of the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament.

1. Members of the IEP are appointed by the House following fair and open competition, we are independent of Members of the House and the House Service. The IEP is neutral on the wider policy questions raised by the Committee’s call for evidence. In adjudicating individual cases we will apply the policies and procedures as agreed by the House impartially, rigorously, and fairly. The Panel will, of course, engage fully in discussions about how best to implement any decisions made by the House.
2. Notwithstanding the IEPs neutrality on the wider questions, in light of question 8 in the call for evidence:

Does the Recall of MPs Act 2015, and other legislation relating to the disqualification of Members, operate satisfactorily? How could it be improved?

it is appropriate to remind the Committee of the lacuna in the Recall of MPs Act 2015 (the 2015 Act) by which a suspension agreed by the House following a recommendation of the IEP cannot trigger a recall petition.

3. Section 1(4) of the 2015 Act requires the qualifying suspension from the House necessary to trigger the “second recall condition” to be imposed “following on from a report from the Committee on Standards”. Section 1(7) specifies that the reference to the Committee on Standards is to a “committee of the House of Commons concerned with the standards of conduct of individual members of that House”. The IEP is, by its very nature, not a committee of the House.
4. The House recognised the necessity of closing this lacuna through the adoption of Standing Order No. 150E in October 2021, following the case of Rob Roberts MP who was suspended from the House for six weeks on the recommendations of the IEP for sexual misconduct but not subject to a recall petition. Where the IEP determines a sanction that would if recommended by the Committee on Standards trigger a recall petition, SO No. 150E requires the Committee on Standards to make a report to the House recommending an identical sanction within three sitting days. The approval of the recommendation in the Committee’s report by the House then satisfies the terms of the 2015 Act.
5. The former Chair of the Committee Sir Chris Bryant identified problems with this approach during the debate that led to the agreement of SO No. 150E:

The slight danger of doing it this way is that something has to go from the Independent Expert Panel to the Committee on Standards. I know that the Committee shall produce a report and it must be equal to the report that has come from the independent expert panel; none the less, there is a danger that the process is a bit more cumbersome and it undermines an element of the independence of the Independent Expert Panel. We might end up having a debate in the Standards Committee, and I think that would be entirely inappropriate. If the House cannot have a debate on it, why on earth should the Standards Committee be able to have a debate on it? I can assure the House, having discussed this with the Standards Committee, that we will not debate that. However, I am the Chair today, and who knows who might be the Chair in the future or who might be the members of the Committee in the future? So I would still prefer us, at some point, to have proper legislation to clear this up, rather than simply relying on the Standing Orders and the good will of the Committee on Standards. [HC Deb, 19 October 2021, Col 639]

6. The IEP would respectfully submit that these problems remain. It has absolute confidence that the current Committee will continue to abide by its self-denying ordinance, but, as the former Chair of the Committee identified, the Committee cannot bind its successors, nor does it remove the inherent impingement on the IEP’s independence.
7. The IEP would therefore recommend that the 2015 Act is amended to bring a suspension imposed by the House following on from a report from the Independent Expert Panel within the ambit of the second recall condition.

September 2023