Publication of Committee on Standards First Report
17 September 2015
The Committee on Standards releases its report into the conduct of Sir Malcolm Rifkind and Mr Jack Straw
- 1st Report: Sir Malcolm Rifkind and Mr Jack Straw
- 1st Report: Sir Malcolm Rifkind and Mr Jack Straw (PDF 495KB)
- Committee on Standards
The Committee is grateful to the Commissioner for her exhaustive inquiry, in which she examined the full transcripts of the interviews with undercover reporters and additionally addressed several allegations which were not in themselves breaches of the Code of Conduct.
The Committee cleared Sir Malcolm and Mr Straw of breaching the Code of Conduct. The Commissioner concludes they did not break the rules by engaging in lobbying for reward or consideration, nor was their conduct such as would bring the House into disrepute.
Committee Chair
The Chair of the Committee, Kevin Barron said:
"The Committee has not hesitated to take action in the past when a media investigation has revealed the rules have been broken.
The debate about whether or not MPs should have outside interests is a legitimate subject for media scrutiny, but the rules currently permit it provided that these are registered in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, and the lobbying rules are not breached. Everything Jack Straw and Malcolm Rifkind said about their earnings was already published online in the Register of Members Interests.
What was said in the interviews should have been reported accurately and measured against the rules of the House. Jack Straw and Sir Malcolm Rifkind were presumed guilty before any authoritative investigation had taken place."
The Committee notes that all those in public life should bear in mind the possibility that what they say in private may become public. Members of Parliament should be aware that even if their behaviour is within the rules, they will not necessarily escape criticism. The Committee reiterates the importance of the seven principles of public life.
As far as actual breaches of the rules relating to the conduct of Members are concerned, the Commissioner has established that:
-
neither Sir Malcolm Rifkind nor Jack Straw was in breach of the rules relating to paid advocacy
-
both observed the requirements relating to registration of interests
-
there was no indication Sir Malcolm would fail in practice to declare interests, and Mr Straw had made declarations of his interests even when such declarations were not required
-
Mr Straw had been particularly at pains to keep his business work separate from Parliamentary resources.
The Committee recognises the role of past media "stings" in uncovering wrongdoing but draws attention to the importance of fair and accurate reporting. It says:
"By selection and omission the coverage distorted the truth and misled the public as to what had actually taken place. The Commissioner rightly draws attention to the continuing debate around MPs' external interests, and notes some of the complexities involved.
This is a legitimate subject for media scrutiny but it places a responsibility on the media to ensure fair and accurate reporting."
The Commissioner's detailed memoranda are appended to the report, and the associated evidence (including transcripts of the Dispatches programme and full transcripts of the recorded meetings with both former MPs) can be found on the Committee's website.
The three lay members of the Committee played a full and active part in the drawing up the Committee’s report, with which they are in agreement.