Morning:
8°c
Peers face suspension over 'cash-for-amendments'
20 May 2009Two peers at the centre of the "cash-for-amendments" affair face becoming the first to be barred from the Upper House in more than 350 years today.
Lord Truscott and Lord Taylor of Blackburn were found guilty by a probe last week of offering to try to change the law in return for money.
The privileges committee decided they had broken rules which state that Lords must "always act on their personal honour", and recommended suspension until the end of the parliamentary session - around six months.
Peers are expected to endorse the sanctions when they debate the committee's report today.
The controversy was triggered by claims in the Sunday Times in January that four Labour peers had told undercover journalists posing as lobbyists that they were willing to try to amend a bill in return for money.
The subcommittee on Lords' interests, which investigated the four cases in detail before submitting its findings to the main privileges committee, concluded Lord Taylor had displayed a "clear willingness" to breach the code of conduct.
Meanwhile, the evidence against Lord Truscott was said to be "so clear and plentiful that we have little doubt that (he) was advertising his power and his willingness to influence parliament in return for substantial financial inducement".
The code bans peers from accepting any financial inducement in return for exercising parliamentary influence.
The last individual to be suspended from the upper house is thought to have been Viscount Savile, who was barred in 1642 for siding with King Charles I.
Two other Labour peers implicated in the affair, Lord Moonie and Lord Snape, were cleared of any wrongdoing but ordered to apologise to the Lords for "inappropriate" conduct.
Reader views (16)
Why just six months? When they return they will continue their activities. They will just be more circumspect.
- Hatchet, Newcastle Australia, 20/05/2009 22:41
Report abuse
Why suspension? If you want to send out a message, sack them with as much publicity as you can muster.
- Colin Macpherson, Gramat France, 20/05/2009 17:32
Report abuse
The whole House of FRAUDS should be investigated and if laws have been broken then criminal charges must follow.
- Mike, London England, 20/05/2009 15:47
Report abuse
about as punative as a morning in the naughty chair
- Philip, castres france, 20/05/2009 15:40
Report abuse
At least the disgraced Taylor's future as 'Freeman of Blackburn' is now imperilled, and will soon be the subject of a council vote.
Even then, though, this censure will only be confirmed by a unanimous [20?] decision!
I do hope it's not a secret ballot, either!
This would be the first 'occasion' of anyone being stripped of this 'honour' in Blackburn.
- Dave, Cumbria, 20/05/2009 14:45
Report abuse
This is a lot more serious than free porn and bathplugs. These guys offered to take money in exchange for amending proposed legislation. I think the law has a term for this: bribery and corruption.
I seem to remember a certain Tory MP in the 90s was found guilty of being paid to ask questions in the Commons on someone else's behalf and as a result ended up losing his seat, was made bankrupt and has resorted to appearing on any old tat on TV. Step forward, Neil Hamilton...
That is the very least that should happen to these so-called peers.
- Nobby Clark, Perth, Scotland, 20/05/2009 14:35
Report abuse
This Nu Labor culture needs to go. Why can they stay in their un-elected positions?? Crash Gordon more shame.
- Steveo, London, NW1, 20/05/2009 14:25
Report abuse
Suspension!!!!! Is that it? This is shambolic to say the least.
Who has the balls to restore order and more importantly trust to our politics? Clearly not Brown, his days are numbered and he knows it.
- Goggs, London, 20/05/2009 13:13
Report abuse
ONE LAW FOR JOE PUBLIC. ANOTHER LAW FOR THOSE WHO MAKE THE LAWS.
WHAT AN ABSOLUTE DISGRACE THESE LORDS ARE NOT ARRESTED AND CHARGED.
- Reuben Camara, Morecambe/Lancaster, 20/05/2009 12:08
Report abuse
This suspension is wholly inadequate. The Palace of Westminster’s reputation is severely damaged, and the inability for Peers not be properly disciplined when they have been caught peddling influence, in the manor that these two were, only adds to the general belief, that all our representatives consider themselves above the law and are only interested in lining their own pockets. They should have been thrown out, and if they had not broken any laws, there should be laws to prevent peddling of influence like this. Having seen the recording of Lord (??) Taylor, I was disgusted. The inability for the Lords to adequately discipline (and to be seen to do so) will only bring the House of Lords into further disrepute.
- Jeremy E, Home Counties, 20/05/2009 11:31
Report abuse
No Police arrests on the horizon I see.
Oh public sector INNIT you can break the law, and get away with it.
- P Staker, London, 20/05/2009 11:05
Report abuse
You can't keep a good socialist down can you. Not only are Labours socialst MPs, who 'represent' some of the most deprived areas of Britain, top of the league when it comes to fiddling tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money through their expenses claims, but they are also top of the House of Lords league of members who have been securing 'extra' income by offering to influence legislation in exchange for tax free lumps of cash. Crash Gordons response '.. I am appalled and didn't know what was going on..'. Well Gordon we, the general public, were well aware of what had been going on for years. You and your Government just chose to turn a blind eye, no joke intended, and decided to ignore it until the press published the details. The only honourable thing left for you to do is call a general election before further revelations about the depth of Labour MPs dishonesty become public knowledge.
- Pip, sutton surrey, 20/05/2009 10:31
Report abuse
Such "punishment" is an insult to law abiding citizens. They ought to be sacked and made face a criminal investigation. A mere suspension allows them to return in six months' time and recommence "business as usual". Their refusal to resign signifies a very serious flaw in their characters. I have no respect for an upper House which "houses" such corrupt members.
- R.F., Yorks, UK, 20/05/2009 10:04
Report abuse
Big deal whats a suspension for these crooks? its more like detention at school.
IF THEY HAVE BROKEN THE LAW AS INDEED IT LOOKS AS IF THEY HAVE THEN THEY SHOULD BE BANNED FOR LIFE AND FACE CRIMINAL CHARGES.
- Mike, London England, 20/05/2009 09:47
Report abuse
Surely the punishment for this kind of corruption should go way beyond a token suspension.
- C, UK, 20/05/2009 09:05
Report abuse
Suspension for 6 months? How about a criminal investigation under the auspices of treason? Also, did they declare the cash that was given to them? The tax man needs to get involved too perhaps? How would they have explained the cash when they submitted their income to the tax man-or maybe they didn't declare it at all....One more for the p[olice! I understand that they feel they need to deal with street crime, maybe there should be a special body hived off from the main force, say about 20, who's sole task would be to investigate the corruption/fraudulent claims in both houses?
- Paul Willis, Swindon England, 20/05/2009 08:38
Report abuse
