Two members of the House of Lords are set to be suspended over a cash for access scandal following meetings with undercover journalists.
Former British Army chief Lord Dannatt and Lord Evans of Watford were found to have broken the rules on providing parliamentary services in return for “payment or reward” in separate cases.
Politics latest: Badenoch says she’s getting better as Tory leader
Lord Evans will be suspended from the Lords for five months, and Lord Dannatt for four months, after the Lords Conduct Committee upheld the findings and recommendations of the independent Commissioner for Standards.
Their suspensions, which neither peer appealed, will come into force once agreed by the House of Commons.
Crossbench peer Lord Dannatt was found to have showed a “clear willingness to undertake activity that would have amounted to paid parliamentary services” during his conversations with the Guardian undercover journalists, but no money was exchanged.
However, it later emerged he provided parliamentary services in return for payment in three other cases.
Two-thirds of woman in armed forces have experienced sexualised behaviour, damning internal survey finds
Family of Kenyan woman allegedly murdered by British soldier welcome extradition proceedings
Soldiers hospitalised yet again after riding around in army’s problem-plagued vehicle
He corresponded with ministers and officials on behalf of companies in which he had a financial interest, and, in two cases, attended a meeting with a minister or senior official.
UK Mitrogen, Teledyne UK and Blue International Holdings were the companies.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
The conduct committee said it gave “due weight to Lord Dannatt’s expressions of remorse and recognition of the potential damage such cases cause to the reputation of the House”.
But it added: “The key aggravating factor in the case was the fact that there were four separate findings of breaches of the code. The sheer number of Lord Dannatt’s improper interactions with ministers or officials, and their duration over a period of two years, justify a significant sanction.”
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Labour peer Lord Evans, a publisher and entrepreneur, was accused of offering “cash for access” during meetings with undercover Guardian journalists posing as potential clients of Affinity, a company owned by his son, and which the peer holds a third of the shares.
The commissioner said Lord Evans failed to act on his personal honour when he told the undercover reporters he would be willing to introduce them to MPs, given his financial interest in Affinity.
Be the first to get Breaking News
Install the Sky News app for free
Lord Evans also sponsored events at the House of Lords on behalf of the company and approached fellow peers to speak at those events, so provided parliamentary services to the company he had a financial incentive in.
It was also concluded Lord Evans broke House of Lords events rules as tickets for the events were advertised at above cost price.
The events were used to promote and drum up business for Affinity – and Lord Evans, as sponsor of the events, “failed to satisfy himself that the events complied with the house’s rules”, the commissioner said.
Lord Dannatt said the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists also investigated the “two UK-based matters”, and concluded he had not conducted consultant lobbying.
In a statement, he said: “I deeply regret the commissioner’s findings regarding my personal honour, and I decided that the honourable course of action was not to waste the conduct committee’s time by appealing against the findings but to accept the appropriate sanction.
“I accept further that ignorance of all aspects of the code of conduct does not constitute a defence and that registration of my interests with the Registrar of Lords’ Interests, and my declaration of my relevant interests in correspondence and at meetings, as occurred in all three matters, was insufficient.
“I also understand that acting in the national interest in good faith, which was my motivation in the three matters, is not an excuse or justification for breaching the Code of Conduct.
“At nearly 75, no one is too old to learn lessons, and I hope that these activities will be placed in the context of my 56-years public service.”
