Afternoon:
11°c
Lobbying baroness accused of breaching Lords rules
Joe Murphy, Political Editor02.02.09
The £180,000 chief executive of business lobbying group London First today said she was "unashamed" after being dragged into the "peers for hire" furore.
Jo Valentine was accused of breaching House of Lords rules by putting down a string of amendments to planning laws on behalf of the group.
The Liberal Democrats said police should investigate her conduct as part of a full inquiry into allegations that peers have been pocketing huge sums to change laws to suit private firms. The dispute surfaced last week when Lords Truscott, Moonie, Taylor of Blackburn and Snape were revealed in a Sunday newspaper to be allegedly prepared to amend legislation in return for up to £120,000.
There is no suggestion that Lady Valentine has any illicit or undeclared interests. The criticism of her role relates to her high-profile job at London First, an umbrella group for companies ranging from airlines to City finance houses.
Her actions included tabling a series of amendments to planning laws, including pressing for City Hall to have powers to impose business taxes to pay for major infrastructure projects, such as Crossrail, an important London First objective.
But she told the Evening Standard: "I am an unashamed advocate for the interests of London. I do not lobby on behalf of individual companies, but do aim to bring a business perspective to Lords debates."
Lady Valentine said she always declared her post with London First before speaking, so that all peers knew she acted on behalf of a business lobbying group.
The 50-year-old crossbench peeress was ennobled by Tony Blair in 2005 as part of his drive to bring in younger people with expertise of both business and public policy making. She was already in charge of London First at the time and was not asked to give it up.
She said she had no other paid interests apart from her salary with the non-profit organisation. The group produced an analysis of Lords rules to show that there was nothing wrong with her appointment.
But Lib-Dem spokesman Chris Huhne said Scotland Yard should investigate her and three other peers who had put down amendments for business, Lord O'Neill of Clackmannan, Lord Berkeley and Baroness Coussins. Mr Huhne said: "These extra four peers appear to be in the same category where they respectively tabled amendments serving the interests of organisations paying them." Assistant Commissioner John Yates is already considering formal investigations into Lords Truscott and Taylor of Blackburn.
Justice Secretary Jack Straw confirmed he wanted punishments beefed up so that misbehaving peers could be kicked out. Reports today said Lord Archer, who was jailed for perjury, and Lord Black, the newspaper magnate currently in jail, could both be expelled.
Reader views (9)
I,ve got some nasty news for the 'unashamed' baroness.
...........Impeachment & Attainder...........
Impeachment
An impeachment is a criminal trial initiated in the House of Commons with the House of Lords acting as judges. It was first used during the 14th century, fell into disuse from the mid-15th century and was revived during the 17th century at the instigation of Sir Edward Coke in the Parliament of 1621 to ruin the career of his rival Sir Francis Bacon.
Attempts were made to impeach the Duke of Buckingham during the first two Parliaments of Charles I's reign. Each time, the King dissolved Parliament rather than allow his favourite to come to trial. When the Long Parliament met in 1640, the King's unpopular ministers the Earl of Strafford and Archbishop Laud were impeached within weeks of Parliament assembling. Rumours that Parliament was planning to impeach Queen Henrietta Maria because of her involvement in alleged Catholic plots precipitated the King's disastrous attempt to arrest the Five Members in January 1642.
Impeachment continued to be used occasionally throughout the 17th and 18th centuries; its last use in Britain was against Viscount Melville in 1806. It is still on the statute books and a similar procedure is part of the constitution of the United States.
- Frank, Bristol UK
A textbook example of 'Luciferian Arrogance' from those who consider themselves 'above' the Law.
This was the same mistake Lord Archer made.
- Frank, Bristol UK
"I am an unashamed advocate for the interests of London. I do not lobby on behalf of individual companies, but do aim to bring a business perspective to Lords debates."- That is perfectly fine, that is what politicians are for- so long as she is not being paid back-handers by those she advocates. If she is, then she is in their employ and as bent as her NuLiebour colleagues.
- Keith Lonsdale, Doncaster
Hardly surprising that she is "unashamed".The self serving abusers of their position appear to be unaware of the meaning of the word "shame".Conway still an MP,the 4 Peers caught offering to accept bribes on camera,Mandelson twice "disgraced"...the list is endless.Until a prosecution is pursued with a prison sentence if found guilty our politicians fear nothing.
- P.Doff, filey uk
Then there's the lot who are in denial. Members of this current govt who when asked about discrepancies in expense claims/allowances replied Its a mistake, I'm not an accountant. Funny that, I trained under one of them before he resigned his position with the Comapny I worked for, and went into honest work in politics.
- Alan, carlisle uk
Yes with Lord 'Muck' back, it's a free for all.
- Frank, Home Counties, England
Sadly both houses are harbouring convicted felons, corrupt and dishonest members and the electorate have no respect for any of them.
- R.F., Yorks, UK
Politicians and the rich and famous feathering their own nests, surely not. When did this start, I just cannot believe it!
- Trevor, Southend UK
Have you heard about the new board game about BOTH Houses of Parliament? Instead of Snakes & Ladders, it's now called Troughs and Snouts. All proceeds to..er...'charity' of course.
- Joannie, London, England
