Latest news with #ErskineMay
Rhyl Journal
4 days ago
- Politics
- Rhyl Journal
Fine witnesses who mislead select committees, MP urges
Mark Pritchard warned that witnesses 'get away with it' if they provide inaccurate evidence and statements. According Parliament's rulebook Erskine May, the Commons has not imposed a fine in 359 years, since 1666, the year the Great Fire of London broke out. 'Of course, there is the ministerial code, there are the Nolan Principles, and there is the contempt of Parliament procedures, but there hasn't been a fine since that time,' Mr Pritchard told the Commons. 'And for members and non-members alike, what is the deterrent? What is the incentive, even, for telling the truth to this place? 'Ministers of course can be brought back to the House, correct the record, but people giving evidence to select committees? There really is a gap at the moment. 'Isn't it time we put fines on a statutory basis for members and non-members alike so that we can always be assured that people are incentivised to tell the truth, and have a deterrent should they be tempted not to tell the truth?' Commons Leader Lucy Powell said Mr Pritchard had raised a 'very, very serious issue'. She added that there are 'many, many ways for members to hold ministers account', including by raising points of order, asking questions, and making complaints through a standards procedure. Conservative MP Mr Pritchard later told the PA news agency: 'The current sanctions for ministers and MPs work quite well, but for non-member witnesses giving evidence to Parliament, the sanctions are weak to non-existent. 'Fines for contempt before a select committee, for example, need to be put on a statutory footing. 'This will act as both a deterrent and incentive for all public officials and external witnesses who might be tempted, on the rarest of occasions, to mislead Parliament whilst giving evidence before any of Parliament's committees.' The Wrekin MP added: 'Currently, anyone apart from members and ministers can lie to Parliament, if they were so tempted, and get away with it. 'That is a significant gap in Parliament's powers to scrutinise. 'Other Parliaments have considerably more powers than Westminster to sanction anyone who lies to the legislature.' New Zealand's House of Representatives is one such Parliament, where its members can agree to fine people up to 1,000 US dollars for contempt.
Glasgow Times
4 days ago
- Politics
- Glasgow Times
Fine witnesses who mislead select committees, MP urges
Mark Pritchard warned that witnesses 'get away with it' if they provide inaccurate evidence and statements. According Parliament's rulebook Erskine May, the Commons has not imposed a fine in 359 years, since 1666, the year the Great Fire of London broke out. 'Of course, there is the ministerial code, there are the Nolan Principles, and there is the contempt of Parliament procedures, but there hasn't been a fine since that time,' Mr Pritchard told the Commons. 'And for members and non-members alike, what is the deterrent? What is the incentive, even, for telling the truth to this place? 'Ministers of course can be brought back to the House, correct the record, but people giving evidence to select committees? There really is a gap at the moment. 'Isn't it time we put fines on a statutory basis for members and non-members alike so that we can always be assured that people are incentivised to tell the truth, and have a deterrent should they be tempted not to tell the truth?' A recreation of the Great Fire Of London of 1666, the same year a fine was last issued by the Commons (Hannah McKay/PA) Commons Leader Lucy Powell said Mr Pritchard had raised a 'very, very serious issue'. She added that there are 'many, many ways for members to hold ministers account', including by raising points of order, asking questions, and making complaints through a standards procedure. Conservative MP Mr Pritchard later told the PA news agency: 'The current sanctions for ministers and MPs work quite well, but for non-member witnesses giving evidence to Parliament, the sanctions are weak to non-existent. 'Fines for contempt before a select committee, for example, need to be put on a statutory footing. 'This will act as both a deterrent and incentive for all public officials and external witnesses who might be tempted, on the rarest of occasions, to mislead Parliament whilst giving evidence before any of Parliament's committees.' The Wrekin MP added: 'Currently, anyone apart from members and ministers can lie to Parliament, if they were so tempted, and get away with it. 'That is a significant gap in Parliament's powers to scrutinise. 'Other Parliaments have considerably more powers than Westminster to sanction anyone who lies to the legislature.' New Zealand's House of Representatives is one such Parliament, where its members can agree to fine people up to 1,000 US dollars for contempt.
The Independent
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
Fine witnesses who mislead select committees, MP urges
Fines for contempt of Parliament need a 'statutory footing' to stop witnesses from misleading select committees, an MP has said. Mark Pritchard warned that witnesses 'get away with it' if they provide inaccurate evidence and statements. According Parliament's rulebook Erskine May, the Commons has not imposed a fine in 359 years, since 1666, the year the Great Fire of London broke out. 'Of course, there is the ministerial code, there are the Nolan Principles, and there is the contempt of Parliament procedures, but there hasn't been a fine since that time,' Mr Pritchard told the Commons. 'And for members and non-members alike, what is the deterrent? What is the incentive, even, for telling the truth to this place? 'Ministers of course can be brought back to the House, correct the record, but people giving evidence to select committees? There really is a gap at the moment. 'Isn't it time we put fines on a statutory basis for members and non-members alike so that we can always be assured that people are incentivised to tell the truth, and have a deterrent should they be tempted not to tell the truth?' Commons Leader Lucy Powell said Mr Pritchard had raised a 'very, very serious issue'. She added that there are 'many, many ways for members to hold ministers account', including by raising points of order, asking questions, and making complaints through a standards procedure. Conservative MP Mr Pritchard later told the PA news agency: 'The current sanctions for ministers and MPs work quite well, but for non-member witnesses giving evidence to Parliament, the sanctions are weak to non-existent. 'Fines for contempt before a select committee, for example, need to be put on a statutory footing. 'This will act as both a deterrent and incentive for all public officials and external witnesses who might be tempted, on the rarest of occasions, to mislead Parliament whilst giving evidence before any of Parliament's committees.' The Wrekin MP added: 'Currently, anyone apart from members and ministers can lie to Parliament, if they were so tempted, and get away with it. 'That is a significant gap in Parliament's powers to scrutinise. 'Other Parliaments have considerably more powers than Westminster to sanction anyone who lies to the legislature.' New Zealand's House of Representatives is one such Parliament, where its members can agree to fine people up to 1,000 US dollars for contempt.
North Wales Chronicle
4 days ago
- Politics
- North Wales Chronicle
Fine witnesses who mislead select committees, MP urges
Mark Pritchard warned that witnesses 'get away with it' if they provide inaccurate evidence and statements. According Parliament's rulebook Erskine May, the Commons has not imposed a fine in 359 years, since 1666, the year the Great Fire of London broke out. 'Of course, there is the ministerial code, there are the Nolan Principles, and there is the contempt of Parliament procedures, but there hasn't been a fine since that time,' Mr Pritchard told the Commons. 'And for members and non-members alike, what is the deterrent? What is the incentive, even, for telling the truth to this place? 'Ministers of course can be brought back to the House, correct the record, but people giving evidence to select committees? There really is a gap at the moment. 'Isn't it time we put fines on a statutory basis for members and non-members alike so that we can always be assured that people are incentivised to tell the truth, and have a deterrent should they be tempted not to tell the truth?' Commons Leader Lucy Powell said Mr Pritchard had raised a 'very, very serious issue'. She added that there are 'many, many ways for members to hold ministers account', including by raising points of order, asking questions, and making complaints through a standards procedure. Conservative MP Mr Pritchard later told the PA news agency: 'The current sanctions for ministers and MPs work quite well, but for non-member witnesses giving evidence to Parliament, the sanctions are weak to non-existent. 'Fines for contempt before a select committee, for example, need to be put on a statutory footing. 'This will act as both a deterrent and incentive for all public officials and external witnesses who might be tempted, on the rarest of occasions, to mislead Parliament whilst giving evidence before any of Parliament's committees.' The Wrekin MP added: 'Currently, anyone apart from members and ministers can lie to Parliament, if they were so tempted, and get away with it. 'That is a significant gap in Parliament's powers to scrutinise. 'Other Parliaments have considerably more powers than Westminster to sanction anyone who lies to the legislature.' New Zealand's House of Representatives is one such Parliament, where its members can agree to fine people up to 1,000 US dollars for contempt.
Leader Live
4 days ago
- Politics
- Leader Live
Fine witnesses who mislead select committees, MP urges
Mark Pritchard warned that witnesses 'get away with it' if they provide inaccurate evidence and statements. According Parliament's rulebook Erskine May, the Commons has not imposed a fine in 359 years, since 1666, the year the Great Fire of London broke out. 'Of course, there is the ministerial code, there are the Nolan Principles, and there is the contempt of Parliament procedures, but there hasn't been a fine since that time,' Mr Pritchard told the Commons. 'And for members and non-members alike, what is the deterrent? What is the incentive, even, for telling the truth to this place? 'Ministers of course can be brought back to the House, correct the record, but people giving evidence to select committees? There really is a gap at the moment. 'Isn't it time we put fines on a statutory basis for members and non-members alike so that we can always be assured that people are incentivised to tell the truth, and have a deterrent should they be tempted not to tell the truth?' Commons Leader Lucy Powell said Mr Pritchard had raised a 'very, very serious issue'. She added that there are 'many, many ways for members to hold ministers account', including by raising points of order, asking questions, and making complaints through a standards procedure. Conservative MP Mr Pritchard later told the PA news agency: 'The current sanctions for ministers and MPs work quite well, but for non-member witnesses giving evidence to Parliament, the sanctions are weak to non-existent. 'Fines for contempt before a select committee, for example, need to be put on a statutory footing. 'This will act as both a deterrent and incentive for all public officials and external witnesses who might be tempted, on the rarest of occasions, to mislead Parliament whilst giving evidence before any of Parliament's committees.' The Wrekin MP added: 'Currently, anyone apart from members and ministers can lie to Parliament, if they were so tempted, and get away with it. 'That is a significant gap in Parliament's powers to scrutinise. 'Other Parliaments have considerably more powers than Westminster to sanction anyone who lies to the legislature.' New Zealand's House of Representatives is one such Parliament, where its members can agree to fine people up to 1,000 US dollars for contempt.
