Former Tory embroiled in controversial sleaze scandal asks Starmer for his day in court! B
Owen Paterson wants PM to waive parliamentary rules to let him challenge 2021 findings of ‘serious and numerous’ standards breaches
A former Conservative cabinet minister who was embroiled in a lobbying row has asked Sir Keir Starmer to let him have his day in court.
Owen Paterson has broken his silence three years after quitting politics when the parliamentary standards committee recommended he should face a 30-day suspension.
The panel of MPs concluded in November 2021 that Mr Paterson had repeatedly lobbied on behalf of clinical diagnostics company Randox and food manufacturer Lynn’s Country Foods.
The-then prime minister Boris Johnson attempted to delay Mr Paterson’s suspension by introducing a new committee with its own appeal process but a revolt by Tory backbenchers forced him into a climbdown.
Mr Paterson has now written to the Prime Minister asking to be allowed to challenge the findings of the committee, which are protected by parliamentary privilege, in court.
In his letter to Sir Keir, he claimed there was not a “scrap of evidence” against him and that 17 supportive witnesses would be able to prove his innocence “beyond doubt”.
Mr Paterson wrote: “There was, and remains, no appeal possible against the committee’s findings. These are protected by parliamentary privilege.
“My life has been turned upside-down by a process from which natural justice has been completely excluded. I have been deprived of any right either to produce or challenge evidence and my representatives have been prevented from speaking on my behalf.
“I am writing to request that you use your offices to waive parliamentary privilege in this matter and thus allow me to bring my case before the courts and expose the allegations against me to a judicial process which we both respect.”
Kathryn Stone, the parliamentary standards commissioner at the time of Mr Paterson’s case, found the former environment secretary “repeatedly used his position as an MP to promote companies who have paid him”.
Supporters of Ms Stone argued strongly at the time against any suggestion of any wrongdoing on her part in the case.
The final report by the standards committee said: “Mr Paterson’s breaches of the lobbying were so serious and so numerous that they risked damaging public trust in the House and its members.”
Mr Paterson’s plea to Sir Keir came ahead of the release of a new documentary this week called Justice? The Owen Paterson Story.
In the half-hour film, Mr Paterson claimed the standards committee had been “out to get me” and suggested the panel had targeted him because he was a “big dog Brexiteer”.
“I just want to have my day in court, that’s all I’m asking for,” he said.
“If I then go down, I will at least be satisfied that justice has been seen to be done. But I do not want any other human being to go through what I and my family have been put through.”
Mr Paterson has previously argued the investigation into his conduct “undoubtedly played a major role” in the suicide of his wife, Rose, in 2020.
He also rejected allegations he had helped Randox to secure a Covid contract worth £133 million.
Philip Barden, Mr Paterson’s lawyer, said Mr Paterson was right to alert the Food Safety Agency to the contamination of milk and ham by prohibited substances that can cause cancer.
Sir Iain Duncan Smith, who was cleared by the committee more than two decades ago, told the documentary: “Of course I may be criticised for saying this, but I don’t think it’s quite as open or rigorous as it was then.”
Rory Stewart – who Mr Paterson met in his then ministerial role to explain how medical equipment used to save lives in the third world was not working properly – will also be seen defending him.
“I don’t believe that what he did would be constituted as lobbying. He declared that he was a consultant, he clearly worked for a company that did blood testing,” Mr Stewart said.
“I didn’t feel he’d done anything any different from what I saw MPs doing all the time and I thought the whole meeting was conducted under the proper rules with civil servants present.
“We followed proper process and I felt very sorry that his name was being blackened in that way.”
Parliamentary sources said there was no power to waive Article 9 of the Bill of Rights and noted the standards committee had a Tory majority at the time of the investigation into Mr Paterson.
They added that the European Court of Human Rights had thrown out Mr Paterson’s case.
The Committee on Standards and the Office of the Standards Commissioner were contacted for comment.
