Prominent peer claims expenses race bias

A prominent peer voiced concerns that inconsistent investigation procedures were due to race bias after three peers were suspended from the House of Lords over their expenses claims.

Crossbencher Lord Bhatia, and Labour members Baroness Uddin and Lord Paul were accused in Privilege and Conduct Select Committee reports of designating their main home as properties in which they didn’t live, thereby enabling them to claim overnight expenses.

Lord Alli debating in the House of Lords, yesterday, highlighted concerns of inconsistent procedures directed at Lord Bhatia, Lord Paul and Baroness Uddin because of their race. Lord Alli said: “I want to address a second and equally troubling aspect of all three cases. That is the element of race. Let me say from the outset that I do not in any way wish to accuse any member of the committee or the sub-committee of racism. That would be quite improper and wrong, but it cannot have escaped your Lordships' attention that the only three Members of your Lordships' House who were referred … and subsequently investigated under these procedures were all Asian."

Lord Alli continued: “I have reviewed the list of Members-some 20 in total-who have had expense complaints referred to the Clerk of Parliaments and I cannot find any consistent pattern for the referrals. When one combines inconsistency in approach and the disproportionality of the sanctions, my concerns deepen. Something clearly has gone wrong, so I ask that the Leader of the House, with the support of other noble Lords who perhaps have more experience in this field, look into the matter and report back to the House.”

“I recognise that members of the public have a right to expect the highest standards of behaviour … and those who do not meet them should rightly be punished. However, in the rush to apologise for an expense system for which we should all be embarrassed, it should not be at the cost of justice or fairness for all, regardless of race.” Said Lord Alli.

The reports were leaked to the Sunday Times on the weekend before it was published or put before the House of Lords.

Chairman of the committee that looks into issues which affect the privileges of the House or of its members of the House, Lord Brabazon of Tara said: “I can assure the House that we took all reasonable steps to prevent any leak, and I deeply regret that there was a leak, particularly in so far as it caused any distress to the three noble Lords who are the subjects of the reports.”

The three separate investigations were all started during the Labour government and were the last that would use procedures agreed in December 2008. Future investigations will now be carried out independently by standards commissioner, Paul Kernaghan with new rules and a new code of conduct.

The standards commissioner’s findings will be presented to the relevant sub-committee and, if appropriate, the sub-committee will put their recommendations forward for sanction by the main committee; allowing for appeals to be made to the main committee against both the investigation and recommendation stages.

The Lords Conduct sub-committee concluded the three peers had wrongly claimed sums equal to several thousand pounds in bad faith for properties outside London, that were designated as main residences – when they lived in other properties situated substantially inside London.

Lord Paul, one of the country’s richest men and a major party donor, was found not to have acted in bad faith but was grossly irresponsible and negligent of his duty to ensure that any money claimed from public funds was properly payable. He was suspended for four months and has since voluntarily repaid £42,000.

Lord Bhatia wrongly claimed over £27,000 in bad faith, it was decided. The peer has since repaid the entire amount. Lord Tara said: “He has not apologised or acknowledged that he acted wrongly. We therefore recommend that he be suspended from the service of the House for eight months.”

Neighbours of Baroness Uddin’s designated property in Maidstone provided the police investigation with statements saying that the property had remained unoccupied for years. The main committee decided that it would be unfair to attach any weight to such “untested third-party” evidence.

It was concluded that the Baroness failed to reasonably interpret the term "main residence,” and did not act in good faith. She was suspended from parliament until Easter 2012. Lord Tara said: “She chose, over a period of years, to designate as main residences properties which she repeatedly described as "bolt-holes".A bolt-hole is not a main residence, and the noble Baroness's designations were wholly unreasonable. We therefore upheld the sub-committee's finding that she wrongly claimed just over £125,000 over a four-year period, and that she should repay this money to the House. She has not acknowledged that she claimed the money wrongly; nor has she apologised in terms.”

Following the appeals made by the peers to the Lords select committee, Lord Tara outlined the principles behind the final conclusions to recommend suspending the members from parliament. He said: “We accept entirely the sub-committee's conclusion that, in each case, money was wrongly claimed…. and therefore concluded that the length of suspension should not be linked to repayment.”

“I believe that the House would not wish to turn internal disciplinary hearings into full-blown, adversarial court proceedings, with prosecution and defence lawyers and the cross-examination of witnesses. In fact, the House has explicitly agreed, more than once, that proceedings should be kept relatively informal. On the other hand, we need to ensure…that no noble Lord is found guilty on the basis of hearsay.” Said Lord Tara.

Baroness Flather disagreed that the possibility of procedural racism should be looked into, she said: “I have looked at the reports and I have no complaint to make. This is a very sad day for me personally, because the three peers are all Asians. When you are a member of a minority and you read in the press that three members of the same minority have been found to have cheated on their expenses, it is hard to bear. I am disappointed and distressed and I am sad that this involves three Asian peers.”

By Davina Kirwan