THE Standards Commissioner who ruled that former North Shropshire MP Owen Paterson had broken parliamentary rules over lobbying should have her decision-making powers stripped back.

That is according to review ordered after MPs tried to overturn Parliamentary Standards Commissioner Kathryn Stone's decision to suspend Mr Paterson for 30 days last year.

The Commons Committee on Standards last year appointed Sir Ernest Ryder to conduct a review of the Parliamentary standards procedures, which also recommends that MPs also not be allowed to amend reports.

Although a review of the code of conduct for MPs had been in the works since September 2020, there was added impetus in the wake of the sleaze scandal around Mr Paterson, who was found to repeatedly lobbied on behalf of two companies for which he was acting as a paid consultant – Randox and Lynn’s Country Foods.

Mr Paterson claimed the investigation was unfairly conducted and argued the manner in which it was carried out had played a “major role” in his wife Rose’s suicide.

When the Commons was asked to approve his recommended 30 sitting-day suspension, the Government launched a staunch defence and attempted to stave off his punishment through a Tory amendment calling for a review of his case and wider procedures.

Following a furious backlash, there was a U-turn within 24 hours and Mr Paterson resigned, but concerns remained that changes still needed to be made to the system.

Now, among a number of recommendations, senior judge Sir Ernest said MPs should no longer be able to debate or make amendments to standards reports when they come to the Commons for approval.

Sir Ernest’s report, released by the Committee on Standards on Friday, noted how Ms Stone’s role was currently to be “both the investigator and the decision-maker” on whether an MP had broken conduct rules.

But Sir Ernest said the two should be separated and that in future her “findings” should be considered as her opinion to be delivered to the Committee on Standards, with the committee making the first decision over whether there had been a breach.

“In my judgment, it is unhelpful to characterise the commissioner’s findings as a first-instance decision or to treat the committee’s decision as an appeal from the commissioner,” he said.

“The commissioner should not be both the investigator and a decision-maker.”

He also said the conduct process should have a right of appeal for MPs outside of the commissioner and committee, perhaps utilising the Independent Expert Panel which is currently only for appeals and sanctions into bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct complaints.

But he said this should only be to appeal against procedure and proportionality, not over a ruling of whether rules had been breached.

Sir Ernest also recommended that Ms Stone not be present at any committee meeting where the MP under investigation was not in attendance.

He said that although Ms Stone would ever only be there to “facilitate her general advisory functions to the committee not to take part in the decision in relation to the individual case”, it would prevent the “inadvertent impression of irregularity or unfairness”.

Labour MP Chris Bryant said: “I welcome Sir Ernest Ryder’s thorough review into the standards system and thank him for the work he has done."

The committee will consult on the changes until March 28, before deciding on Sir Ernest’s proposals, and the final proposed changes will then be voted on by MPs.