Alison Seabeck

House of Commons Committee on Standards and Privileges Alison Seabeck Twelfth Report of Session 2010–11 Report and Appendix, together with formal minutes Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 1 March 2011 HC 840 Published on 3 March 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Committee on Standards and Privileges The Committee on Standards and Privileges is appointed by the House of Commons to oversee the work of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards; to examine the arrangements proposed by the Commissioner for the compilation, maintenance and accessibility of the Register of Members’ Interests and any other registers of interest established by the House; to review from time to time the form and content of those registers; to consider any specific complaints made in relation to the registering or declaring of interests referred to it by the Commissioner; to consider any matter relating to the conduct of Members, including specific complaints in relation to alleged breaches in the Code of Conduct which have been drawn to the Committee’s attention by the Commissioner; and to recommend any modifications to the Code of Conduct as may from time to time appear to be necessary. Current membership Rt hon Kevin Barron MP (Labour, Rother Valley) (Chair) Sir Paul Beresford MP (Conservative, Mole Valley) Tom Blenkinsop MP (Labour, Middlesbrough South & East Cleveland) Annette Brooke MP (Liberal Democrat, Mid Dorset and North Poole) Rt hon Tom Clarke MP (Labour, Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill) Mr Geoffrey Cox MP (Conservative, Torridge and West Devon) Matthew Hancock MP (Conservative, West Suffolk) Mr Oliver Heald MP (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire) Heather Wheeler MP (Conservative, South Derbyshire) Dr Alan Whitehead MP (Labour, Southampton Test) Powers The constitution and powers of the Committee are set out in Standing Order No. 149. In particular, the Committee has power to order the attendance of any Member of Parliament before the committee and to require that specific documents or records in the possession of a Member relating to its inquiries, or to the inquiries of the Commissioner, be laid before the Committee. The Committee has power to refuse to allow its public proceedings to be broadcast. The Law Officers, if they are Members of Parliament, may attend and take part in the Committee’s proceedings, but may not vote. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at: www.parliament.uk/sandp. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Mr Steve Priestley (Clerk), Miss Rhiannon Hollis (Second Clerk) and Ms Jane Cooper (Committee Assistant). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to The Clerk of the Committee on Standards and Privileges, Journal Office, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6615. Alison Seabeck 1 Contents Report Page Alison Seabeck 3 Introduction 3 The Commissioner’s findings 3 Conclusion and recommendation 6 Appendix: Memorandum from the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards 8 Formal Minutes 50 Alison Seabeck 3 Alison Seabeck Introduction 1. In this Report we consider a memorandum from the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, reporting on his consideration of a complaint made against Alison Seabeck, the Member for Plymouth, Moor View, that she failed to declare an indirect interest in the Fire Protection Association when she took part in the debate in the House on the Second Reading of the Fire Safety (Protection of Tenants) Bill on 19 November 2010. The complaint was made by the Member for Hexham, Guy Opperman. 2. The rules of the House require Members to declare indirect interests, including those of a spouse or partner, when they are relevant to the proceeding in which they are taking part.1 Ms Seabeck’s partner is Nick Raynsford, the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich. The Commissioner notes that Mr Raynsford had, in the 12 months preceding the debate, a registered financial interest as a non-executive board member of the Fire Protection Association and as Chair of its Advisory Council.2 In that period, Mr Raynsford had also registered financial interests as honorary vice-chairman of the Construction Industry Council and as chairman of the National House-Building Council (NHBC) Foundation. 3. The Commissioner’s memorandum is appended to this Report. In accordance with our established procedures, we supplied Ms Seabeck with a copy of the memorandum and asked if she wished to give evidence to the Committee, orally or in writing. Ms Seabeck did not give evidence. The Commissioner’s findings 4. Ms Seabeck was appointed the official Opposition spokesperson on housing on 11 October 2010.3 Although she was not the shadow lead on fire issues, Ms Seabeck represented the official Opposition in the debate on 19 November 2010 on the Second Reading of the Fire Safety (Protection of Tenants) Bill. Ms Seabeck told the Commissioner that she stood in at the last minute for her front-bench colleague.4 5. The Fire Safety (Protection of Tenants) Bill is a private Member’s bill. Its main provision requires landlords to provide smoke alarms in rented accommodation.5 Ms Seabeck spoke in the debate and intervened on three occasions. In one intervention, she asked the Minister representing the Government when he last met organisations such as the Fire Commission and the Fire Protection Association. In another, she expressed her hope that 1 Appendix, paragraphs 7 to 13. The term ‘proceeding’ does not include the asking of a supplementary question. 2 Appendix, paragraph 66 3 Appendix, paragraph 62 4 Appendix, paragraph 63 5 The full text of the Bill is available at www.parliament.uk 4 Alison Seabeck the Minister would meet the Fire Commission.6 Ms Seabeck did not declare any financial interest either during her speech or in her interventions.7 6. Ms Seabeck told the Commissioner that her reference to the Fire Protection Association and other organisations when first intervening on the Minister had been made on the spur of the moment.8 She judged that no declaration was necessary and she suggested that to have made one might have impeded the business of the House. 7. The Commissioner points out that the rules require Members to declare indirect as well as direct financial interests where the interest is relevant to a debate or other proceeding in the House and that indirect interests specifically include the interests of a spouse or partner.9 He concludes that the fact that Ms Seabeck’s partner is also a Member of Parliament, whose interests are set out in the Register, does not affect the requirement on Ms Seabeck to declare an indirect interest when it is relevant to the proceeding in which she is taking part.10 8. In respect of Mr Raynsford’s registered interests in the NHBC Foundation and the Construction Industry Council, Ms Seabeck told the Commissioner that, while both could be said to have some involvement in issues relating to fire safety in residential accommodation, in her view the interests of those bodies and of the Fire Protection Association are “extremely peripheral” in relation to the Bill.11 9. It is the view of the Registrar of Members’ Financial Interests that Ms Seabeck should have declared Mr Raynsford’s financial interest in the Fire Protection Association during the debate as an indirect interest at the beginning of her speech, or failing that when she intervened on the Minister. Ms Seabeck does not accept the Registrar’s view.12 10. Ms Seabeck told the Commissioner that she sought advice from the Registrar when she was appointed to her front-bench role.13 She accepts that the advice was that she should consider each debate on its merits and declare her indirect interest as appropriate. Ms Seabeck said that she had no intention of raising anything which she believed to be linked to Mr Raynsford’s registered interests, so the issue of considering whether to make a declaration of interest at the beginning of her speech on the Bill did not arise. 11. The Commissioner agrees with the Registrar that Ms Seabeck should have declared an indirect financial interest during the debate on the Fire Safety (Protection of Tenants) Bill on 19 November.14 In his view, the obligation on Ms Seabeck to do this was “clear and unequivocal”: 6 Appendix, paragraph 64 7 Appendix, paragraph 65 8 Appendix, paragraph 70 9 Appendix, paragraph 75 10 Appendix, paragraph 76 11 Appendix, paragraph 71 12 Appendix, paragraph 68 13 Appendix, paragraph 69 14 Appendix, paragraph 80 Alison Seabeck 5 While every Member needs to make a judgement on whether they have a relevant interest, and whether they can declare it in appropriate terms without impeding proceedings, I do not believe that this was a particularly ‘grey area’, as suggested by Ms Seabeck. Ms Seabeck was aware of her partner’s paid role in the Fire Protection Association. Fire safety is at the core of the Fire Protection Association’s interests. Fire safety is the central purpose of smoke alarms. The Bill would require landlords to provide at least one hard-wired smoke alarm in rented residential accommodation. It is inconceivable that that is not of interest to the members of the Fire Protection Association.15 In the Commissioner’s judgment, Ms Seabeck should have recognised that the Fire Protection Association had a central interest in fire safety which was relevant to the debate on the Bill. He concludes that she was clearly in breach of the rules of the House in not declaring her indirect interest.16 12.

Load more