Parliamentary Standards

[JohnL]

There was a petition to require MPs to tell the truth - I just saw the Government response which includes ..

I'm not sure all MPs (all sides, past and present) adhere to these guidelines. But then maybe they do :).

"Once elected to Parliament, all MPs must abide by the seven principles of public life which form the basis of ethical standards expected of holders of public office. These are set out by the Committee on Standards in Public Life and are: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. It is a requirement that any holder of public office must be truthful and must act and take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias.

Upon election, MPs are also subject to the House of Commons Code of Conduct and the Guide to the Rules relating to the Conduct of Members. Included in the code is a general duty on MPs to ?act in the interests of the nation as a whole; and a special duty to their constituents?, alongside a requirement that MPs ?act on all occasions in accordance with the public trust placed in them. They should always behave with probity and integrity, including in their use of public resources.?

The House of Commons Committee on Standards is currently conducting an inquiry into the operation of the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament, in liaison with the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards who will carry out an independent review of the Code. The Committee will publish a report on the code and a public consultation will follow."

[TheCat]

For mine, the discussion about 'lying politicians' rarely seems to take the important step of disaggregating a blatant factual untruth from 'broken promises'....

i.e. I personally wouldn't call it lying when a politician in election mode says....."We're going to cut council tax by 20%"...and then they get elected and it turns out they don't cut council tax by 20%, for what could possibly be a million different reasons. That for me is a broken promise, not an untruth or a lie.

But it would be a lie if say a politician endorsed a fabricated story about....say...an advisor that broke lockdown rules to go for a drive, and claimed he was just testing his eye-sight.

Then there's the grey area between these two examples...lets use 'Get Brexit Done'....'done' obviously means different things to different people, and the slogan is purposefully vague by design. So can we accuse Politicains of 'lying' about getting it 'done', when it wasn't really clear what that was meant to mean in the first place? (arguably vagueness and lack of measureable targets is as serious a problem...but still different from lying nonetheless)

Then there is a general 'exaggeration'....i.e. 'world beating' test and trace.....is this really a lie? Its certainly bluster and bravado to be sure. All politicians exaggerate on a daily basis, as do people in other forms of life; and I think the public can be trusted for the most part to see past that bullsh!t...(i.e. "London's best Pizza/coffee/sandwiches, served here!').

The there's 'conflation'..so for example bucketing anyone questioning lockdown measures in with those who deny the existence of Covid19 as a 'Covid Denier'...is using this term this a lie? I guess much of it probably comes back to whether its purposeful deceit or not.

While all five are clearly undesirable, I think the charge of 'lying' is bandied about too often with regards to MP's of all colours. For mine, a blatant lie is the most galling of the three, as it involves purposeful deceit, rather than just failure to deliver(up as may be the case in the broken promises example).

[KidKruger]

JohnL - this was on my mind a few days ago when I posted about the PM blatantly ignoring direct and closed questions from SirK.

Cat - Sounds like a good out for politicians overall then, act with bluster/boast of things you've no clear way of seeing achievable and you'll be forgiven any lie. No accountability. Current model.

[TheCat]

"Cat - Sounds like a good out for politicians overall then, act with bluster/boast of things you've no clear way of seeing achievable and you'll be forgiven any lie. No accountability. Current model"

No, dont think that's what I said. Not an 'out' at all. I did say that none of the above behaviors are desirable, but all are different...just that conflating and exaggerating everything they say that we dont like by calling it all 'lies' seems a bit disingenuous, almost like we are ly.....:)

If your kid came home and said..."Im going to get 90% on my maths exam tomorrow!"...would you call them a liar if they didnt?

Im also not suggesting that's a good example for all politicians behavior, and when politicians lie, they should be held to account for that, but not everything is a 'lie'

I think its more shades of grey than black and white. Perhaps im being too fastidious with the definition of a lie....

NB: I am in no way a Boris fan despite what some posters on here may think....Boris is man with flexible principles to say the least, and is a serial liar.....it's just that not absolutely everything he says is a lie. So when left-wing politicians, press and others label everything questionable he says as a 'lie', it reduces the impact/care factor of the general public when he is actually lying.

[KidKruger]

That's OK, I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth or say you said that, I was more just outlining the consequence of that situation for us/advantage for politicians.

[TheCat]

Coolio.

I'm pleased. I didn't want to be in another argument on here this week. I've had my fill for a while:)

[JohnL]

I'm not that impressed with Sir Keir either at the moment - he doesn't lie but he isn't holding Boris to account for not answering questions - and neither is the Speaker.

There appears to be no way of turning PMQs into a proper questioning session (although it often is OK when normal MPs ask questions). The best questions are done in committees.

[wordsworth]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm not that impressed with Sir Keir either at the

> moment - he doesn't lie but he isn't holding Boris

> to account for not answering questions - and

> neither is the Speaker.

>

> There appears to be no way of turning PMQs into a

> proper questioning session (although it often is

> OK when normal MPs ask questions). The best

> questions are done in committees.

It's protocol and ridiculously has gone on for years... pomp n crap

[Clutterqueen]

I'm not impressed with Sir Keir's questions at the moment either. He seems to be stuck in the lockdown period back in March 2020.