Image of the PJM Medal
Banner Text = Fight For the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
A Committee on Standards in Public Life - Can we access it?
Author Message
Reply with quote
Post A Committee on Standards in Public Life - Can we access it? 
Blair stands firm over sleaze inquiries
By George Jones, Political Editor
(Filed: 10/03/2006)

Tony Blair was accused yesterday of damaging public confidence in the way alleged misconduct by ministers is policed after No 10 rejected a call for the appointment of an independent investigator.

Sir Alistair Graham, the chairman of the committee on standards in public life, had renewed his call for such matters to be looked into by an independent figure, not the Cabinet Secretary and the Prime Minister.

He claimed that Peter Mandelson would not have been forced to resign from the Cabinet for a second time if there had been a "proper investigation" into the allegations that he had played a role in giving passports to the millionaire Hinduja brothers. A later inquiry cleared him of impropriety.

Sir Alistair said parish councillors could be subject to more stringent checks than Cabinet ministers, as they faced sanctions for failing to declare even a minor gift.

Downing Street made clear there would be no change to the rules, which were used to clear Tessa Jowell, the Culture Secretary, of breaching the ministerial code after she failed to declare her husband's financial interests.

Officials said Mr Blair believed that it was better that the Prime Minister, who was constitutionally responsible for selecting ministers, decided whether they had abided by the code.

"The key word here is accountability and whether you have someone in the end making these decisions who is accountable not just to Parliament but also to the wider electorate," Mr Blair's official spokesman said.

He said an independent figure's adjudication would be no less controversial. However, Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, is understood to be more sympathetic to Sir Alistair's proposals.

Oliver Heald, the Tory constitutional affairs spokesman, said Mr Blair's refusal to establish an independent system was "deeply damaging to public confidence".


_________________
Merdeka, Merdeka, Merdeka,
from the HD Committee and its decision.
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: A Committee on Standards in Public Life - Can we access 
Iceni wrote:
Blair stands firm over sleaze inquiries
By George Jones, Political Editor
(Filed: 10/03/2006)"The key word here is accountability and whether you have someone in the end making these decisions who is accountable not just to Parliament but also to the wider electorate," Mr Blair's official spokesman said.


It should be noted that George Jones is the Political Editor of the Daily Telegraph and a member of the Parliamentary Press Gallery - a long established group.

Many of the points GJ makes are not relevant to the PJM specifically and we must not go down that road - we must not because this web site is not a political lobby area.

But the point that I think Iceni wants to highlight is the general concept of power and accountability. The HD Committee is powerful but not accountable. Furthermore, it works within the Honours in Confidence system within the Imperial Honours System. That has resulted in a recommendation, that affects 35,000 citizens, which cannot easily be put to public debate in the public domain, for example, in the Commons.

I believe blanket protection from public scrutiny may have value when dealing with cases where individuals have been nominated confidentially for an 'Honour' - the Committee members must be able to submit their ‘personal’ recommendations in respect of the individual ‘in confidence’.

But such a system is not appropriate when dealing with considerations regarding the acceptance and wear of a ‘medal’ that has been offered publicly to 35,000 citizens. Those 35,000 men and women have a democratic right to know why a ‘right’ (in this case the right to wear) has been formally withheld. There’s nothing confidential about the PJM - let’s know what is being said and why.

Furthermore, given the circumstances of a public offer of an award and the availability to Committee members of the facility to hide behind a non-public Honours in Confidence system, I believe that it is possible for both ‘own agendas’ and ‘incorrect information’ to become central to the emerging recommendation.

Members of the HD Committee are not infallible - public scrutiny of their deliberations would ensure that any such fallibility can be redressed before citizens’ rights are removed in error … which is precisely what has happened here.

Finally, public debate enables Rules and Policy to be kept under scrutiny and review thus ensuring that they meet the needs of today’s world … which is precisely what has not happened here.

Barry


_________________
BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Re: A Committee on Standards in Public Life - Can we access 
[quote="BarryF"]
Iceni wrote:
Blair stands firm over sleaze inquiries
By George Jones, Political Editor
(Filed: 10/03/2006)

But the point that I think Iceni wants to highlight is the general concept of power and accountability. The HD Committee is powerful but not accountable.

Barry


Indeed.


_________________
Merdeka, Merdeka, Merdeka,
from the HD Committee and its decision.
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: A Committee on Standards in Public Life - Can we access 
[quote="Iceni"]
BarryF wrote:
The HD Committee is powerful but not accountable.


Iceni, I agree with the point you make. If the HD Committee was publicly accountable then I have no doubt that the PJM would have been recommended for wear.


_________________
BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
George F wrote:
I have posted this article on the introduction site to inform subscribers of the different types of HD committees.


I spotted it and replied earlier. It is important that we know they exist and the differences between them. Some are covered by Blair's most recent 'initiative' on 'openness' in the British Honours System. Most Honours Committees now have an independent chair.

The HD Committee that is 'on our case' does not come under that initiative nor is it subject to any 'open' system ... nor to any other scrutiny, public or otherwise, for that matter. It is a 'law' unto itself. Barry


_________________
BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum