Conservative MP and former Secretary of State John Penrose said it was “extremely important” for a democracy to rectify problems with UK standards that affect ministers, MPs, councilors and civil servants. In particular, he called for stricter rules against the lobby, as proposed in a report by Nigel Boardman on the Greensill scandal and the Committee on Standards in Public Life (CSPL). Johnson’s anti-corruption champion since 2017, Penrose resigned from his role last Monday after protesting Johnson’s failure to address Sue Gray’s report that he showed a lack of leadership in parties that break the lock at No. 10 and concluded that this appeared to be a violation of the code. Johnson’s independent adviser on ministerial interests, Lord Gade, had said he felt unable to comment on whether Johnson had violated the code, as he may have felt compelled to resign if his advice had not been followed. That would have put the code in a “ridiculous” position, he claimed. Speaking afterwards, Penrose said he believed that the government’s recent changes in the role of adviser, which allowed him to recommend the launch of an investigation, were “much stronger than before and I think in practical, realistic British terms, we should give it the opportunity to work “. . However, he said there were “new problems that have only arisen in the last two days” when the adviser feels unable to judge whether the prime minister has broken the rules. Penrose suggested that the councilor should not have resigned if his advice had not been followed, in the same way that Sir Chris Whitty, chief physician of England, was not expected to resign if politicians had a different view of him. But he said: “The councilor should be expected to advise whether a prime minister has violated the ministerial code or not, as they already do for any other government minister. “At the moment the prime minister has an exception, and that means there is no public advice for parliament and everyone else, which is not fair at all.” On broader changes to the lobbying standards regime, Penrose said ministers should sign legally binding declarations that they would not put pressure on the government for certain periods after leaving office – making advisory advice mandatory. Business Appointments (Acoba). . “Acoba is not fully legally binding at the moment, and it should be. So what Boardman suggested is that public service contracts should make Acoba decisions binding, and because ministers are not technical staff, it is up to them to sign a legal act that says, ‘I will be bound by the decisions. of Acoba. “It’s a nice, simple way to give Acoba the teeth and nails it needs,” he said. Second, Penrose requested that a more detailed, transparent, and easily searchable record of meetings between companies or representatives of interests and members of the government be published. He said not only ministers but also political advisers and senior civil servants should be subject to such scrutiny. “These are low-cost and easy steps that do not require new legislation and would be a huge boost to transparency and trust in our institutions,” he said. Urging the government to respond to the Boardman report, which was published in the middle of last year, and to address most of the CSPL recommendations, Penrose added: “Resolving these issues is probably more important now than it was here. and years, not only for our current government, but for our entire democracy. “The ministers have promised to respond to these reports, so let’s move on. It is an opportunity to do the right thing and “do good by doing good”, and it will not cost the taxpayer a single bean. Parliament has been hit by a number of lobbying scandals in recent years, including the Greensill scandal, in which former Prime Minister David Cameron pressured his former colleagues via text message on behalf of his employer, a financial company that has since collapsed. The government has also been embroiled in controversy over Owen Patterson, a former Tories minister who has been accused of pressuring government ministers on behalf of two companies. No. 10 tried to orchestrate Patterson’s exclusion from the Commons, which failed and led to Patterson’s resignation and the loss of his secure seat in a run-off election.
