Jim Fitzpatrick - Standards and Privileges Committee Contents


Appendix 2: Written submission to the Committee from Jim Fitzpatrick, 2 September 2010


1.  I appreciate the courtesy and professionalism of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and his staff throughout this process and these proceedings.

2.  My request for a hearing is based on two points:

a)  An acceptance of being 'guilty' of a breach of rules (para 55, page 19) in the immediate aftermath of the expenses scandal carries potential stigma. The Commissioner acknowledges there was money available in the Communications Allowance to cover costs (para 57, page 19), and there was no attempt to misappropriate or misuse public funds.

b)  More importantly, at a time when we are under the closest scrutiny and criticised by many (sometimes unfairly), I believe it part of my duty to be proactive, rather than just reactive. In terms of dealing with anti-social behaviour, I regard trying to connect the local police Safer Neighbourhoods Team with residents affected as part of my responsibilities (para 49, page 17).

3.  Paras 41 and 42 on page 15 highlight that the issue is one of interpretation, where the Director of Resources confirms this to be the case.

4.  Anything an elected politician does will be perceived by some to be 'party political'. I contend the Police would not be associated with any such activity. Para 81 (1), page 27, raises the key point for me: '…not in furtherance of their party political or personal interests.' There was no 'Labour' branding of or at these events. However, it was not only in furtherance of constituents' concerns to get the ASB issue addressed, there was personal interest, a) to reduce the pressure of casework on my office; b) to be seen to be effective, efficient and in touch.

5.  Para 82, page 27, invites the Committee to 'review and tighten' the rules. I believe this the key issue. In the twenty-first century, should MPs be proactive or just reactive. In Poplar and Limehouse, I believe my constituents expect more from me, not less.

In conclusion, I wish to apologise for feeling I needed to bring this matter in front of the Committee, and I will fully accept the judgement that it will make.



 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2010
Prepared 16 September 2010