Andrew Bridgen suspended from Parliament after breaching MPs’ rules

Andrew Bridgen alleges cover up on mRNA vaccines

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info

Andrew Bridgen has failed in his attempt to overturn a 5-day suspension from Parliament and could be in danger of losing almost a month’s pay as an MP if it is enacted today. The Conservative MP for North West Leicestershire received two days suspension for failing to declare that he received a paid trip to Ghana in eight emails to ministers and another three days for writing to the Standards Commissioner Kathryn Stone asking if she had been lobbying to receive a peerage.

The outspoken MP, who recently hit the headlines for making a speech in Parliament calling for the suspension of the mRNA covid vaccine amid concerns it could lead to inflamation to arteries to the heart, will now be suspended for five days.

The appeal was the first of its kind by an MP under a new procedure brought in after the Owen Paterson case where he challenged the result of an inquiry into paid advocacy but was unable to refer it after being recommended for suspension.

Mr Bridgen has declined to comment.

The case was reviewed by an independent panel chaired by former judge Sir Stephen Irwin which dismissed both parts of Mr Bridgen’s appeal.

There had been concerns that he could have had his suspension doubled to 10 days after an appeal which would have triggered a recall vote in his constituency but his suspension remains at five days.

Mr Bridgen was found guilty of receiving paid advocacy for taking a trip to Ghana to look at trees planted by Mere Plantations which were the subject of a tax dispute with HMRC.

In its original ruling, the Standards Committee agreed that had Mr Bridgen not intended to receive money from Mere Plantations he would have amended a contract he signed with the company to reflect that.

The report noted: “The Committee agrees with the Commissioner that Mr Bridgen should have sought to have the contract amended to state this—or ensured that there was a written exchange with Mere Plantations confirming it. The Committee stated that if Mr Bridgen had no intention of undertaking the duties associated with the role, it would have been better for him to have asked to terminate the contract altogether. The Committee concluded overall that Mr Bridgen’s dealings in relation to the contract were ‘a mishandling of the conflict of interest of which he was aware’.”

The panel noted: “The problem of the Appellant acting for MPL arose when he entered into an arrangement with them where he stood to receive or did receive outside benefit.

“Had this not happened there would have been no breach of the lobbying rules. Further, even had it been found that he was acting for his constituents, he could not have claimed the constituency exemption as he would have fallen short of the qualification in the Nota Bene of the guidance cited above.”

Regarding the letter to the commissioner, the Committee had concluded that Mr Bridgen’s email “appears to be an attempt to place wholly inappropriate pressure on the Commissioner. This was completely unacceptable behaviour.”

In response to the appeal, the panel said: “This letter gives the clear appearance of a calculated piece of spite intended to put pressure on the Commissioner in general, and perhaps as a platform for further malicious gossip with those who might listen. There is no proper basis for appeal on this point. This was a clear breach.”

DON’T MISS

‘Rwanda decision shows the courts have changed’ [INSIGHT]

Furious backlash as Biden prepares to appoint Joe Kennedy to NI role [REVEAL]

Should Elon Musk step down as head of Twitter? [REACT]

Source: Read Full Article