Suspensions, and suspensions
8th February, 2010
Here’s something I’m still trying to figure out.
The Labour party announced today that David Chaytor and two other MPs had had their membership of the Labour party suspended. This meant, said a party spokesman, that they had been ’suspended from the whip’ and could not attend party meetings.
But way back in May, when a parliamentary investigation into the Bury North MP was first announced, a Downing Street spokesman said: “After speaking to David Chaytor this morning, the chief whip has suspended him from the privilege of membership of the Parliamentary Labour Party pending further investigations by the parliamentary commissioner for standards.”
As far as I am aware, the commissioner never completed an investigation – it was overtaken by the criminal probe – and the suspension was never lifted.
So what exactly’s going on?
[UPDATE: Hmm. Apparently 'suspension' from 'privilege of membership' of the PLP is quite different from having your Labour party membership suspended. For one thing, it means Mr Chaytor is also banned from attending party events in his constituency.]
Showing 3 comments for “Suspensions, and suspensions”
Paul Smith (08/02/2010 at 2:43 pm)
perhaps he is now being suspended by a more painful part of his anotomy
David Smith (08/02/2010 at 6:31 pm)
Chaytor continued to be a member of the Education Select committee (DCSF) despite those positions being nominated by the whips and theoretically not open to those sans whip.
Kay Peel (08/02/2010 at 6:40 pm)
You are right to bring this matter up.
In normal life, outside the cocoon of Parliament, those under investigation for suspected offences in the workplace are suspended. It’s in the suspect’s interests: s/he cannot be accused of interfering with witnesses or removing documents or covering their tracks because they don’t go near the place and have no contact with the other involved parties.
In the past nine months or so David Chaytor can’t seem to keep away from the House Of Commons. In fact he’s been more visible and active than at any time since he first entered Parliament. Even if he has been careful not to communicate with witnesses, he has still made himself vulnerable to the charge, in my view.
What on earth were the Prime Minister, the Labour Party, the Leader of the House of Commons and the Speaker thinking of when they failed to see that it was in everybody’s interests, as well as in the interests of a fair investigation, to suspend him? They truly are on another planet. If the Labour Party can’t even manage this risk and do the right thing, how can we trust them to manage the country?