Local MPs supported Commons vote that led to 'Tory sleaze' row

Ben Bradley and Lee Anderson backed the change, which concerned the policing of MPs’ conduct, and thus effectively blocked the suspension of Tory colleague Owen Paterson.

Both MPs, and the Conservative government, were accused of “losing their moral compass” by one of Mansfield’s leading politicians, the town’s Mayor, Labour councillor Andy Abrahams.

But Mr Anderson has since explained the reasons behind his vote, admitting “the whole episode has left a bitter taste in my mouth”.

And the outcry has now led to the government performing a U-turn by promising a fresh vote, and to Mr Paterson resigning.

The row began when Parliament’s standards watchdog found that Mr Paterson, MP for North Shropshire, had committed “egregious” breaches of lobbying rules by using his position to benefit two companies he is paid to work for.

He was banned from sitting in the House Of Commons for 30 days and could then have faced a recall petition, which might have led to a by-election for his seat.

However, the government used a three-line whip to force through an amendment-vote to, instead, revamp the disciplinary watchdog and set up an independent appeals panel, thus saving Mr Paterson’s bacon.

Labour duly accused the government of “wallowing in sleaze” and looking after their own at the expense of democracy.

Overseeing the three-line whip, which means telling MPs to urgently attend the Commons for a crucial vote, was Mark Spencer, Conservative MP for Sherwood and Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s right-hand man as Chief Whip.

Like Mansfield MP Mr Bradley and Mr Anderson, MP for Ashfield, Mr Spencer was among the 246 Tory MPs who voted in favour of the reform of the standards system.

Mark Fletcher, who represents Bolsover, was among 98 Conservative MPs who either abstained or were given permission to miss the vote.

Thirteen Tory MPs rebelled and voted against, but the vote was won by a margin of 18.

Coun Abrahams, who is leader of the Labour group at Mansfield District Council, echoed the views of his party by issuing this statement:

"This decision is yet another sad and concerning blow for democracy. The standard of behaviour of this government continues on its downward spiral.

"They have lost their moral compass, and it is no wonder the public has no faith in them.

"Everybody in public office needs to be scrutinised by independent people to keep us on track. Unfortunately, as far as the government is concerned, it’s a case of one rule for us and they can do what they like.”

The day after the vote, Mr Anderson explained that his decision was based on the fact that Mr Paterson was not allowed to appeal against his suspension.

He said: “This whole episode has left a bitter taste in my mouth. I suspect the original findings were probably correct, and Owen Paterson should have been suspended for 30 days.

"However, I supported the amendment as I felt that everyone has the right to appeal a decision that may cost them their job.

“Employment law entitles everyone the right of appeal in the workplace, but MPs do not get that right in this process. Whether an MP is guilty or not, they should be allowed to appeal. I did not vote to stop the suspension.”

The Chad has also asked Mr Bradley, Mr Spencer and Mr Fletcher for their comments on the controversy.

So far, they have not responded. But in any event, the government has been rethinking its plans to overhaul the standards system and has now announced that a new vote in the Commons will be held “as soon as possible”.

It feels the issue should not be based on Mr Paterson's case alone. A spokesman said: “The Prime Minister recognises the strength of feeling on all sides of the House and changed his mind when it became clear a cross-party consensus was not possible.”

This rethink came only after Wednesday’s Commons vote led to a massive backlash, with Clive Betts, a Sheffield-based MP, tweeting: “Same old sleaze, same old Tories. What an absolute affront to democracy.”

Another MP compared the action to what would happen in Russia. while the shadow leader of the House, Thangam Debbonaire, said: “All decent people of all political beliefs must stand against these naked attempts by Tory MPs to avoid scrutiny of their behaviour.”

For the government, business secretary Kwasi Karteng insisted the Tories were “completely focused on trying to restore a degree of integrity and probity in public life”.

Mr Paterson announced his resignation as an MP on Thursday afternoon, saying he will “remain a public servant but outside the cruel world of politics”.

However, he continues to insist he did nothing wrong. He claims the investigation into his behaviour was flawed and that it was “a major contributory factor” to the death of his wife, Rose, who took her own life last year.

The investigation focused on his jobs as a consultant for clinical diagnostics company, Randox Health, and meat distributor Lynn’s Country Foods. They pay him more than £100,000 a year on top of his £88,000 yearly salary as an MP.

MPs are allowed to have such jobs, but they are not allowed to use their influence in Parliament for a company’s gain.

The watchdog, the Commons Standards Committee, concluded that he broke the rules several times.

Ashfield MP Mr Anderson added: “There should be no place in politics for MPs to make financial gain from private companies in return for lobbying.

"We are paid handsomely for the job we do, and if you need an extra £100,000 a year on top, then you should really be looking for another job.”

Support your Chad by becoming a digital subscriber. You will see 70 per cent fewer ads on stories, meaning faster load times and an overall enhanced user-experience. Click here to subscribe.