Support quality, independent, local journalism…that matters

From just £1 a month you can help fund our work – and use our website without adverts. Become a member today

The Senedd’s standards commissioner has warned a proposed two-year “cooling-off” period for former politicians to sit as “lay” members of a conduct committee is too short.

Douglas Bain gave evidence on Tuesday November 11 on the accountability bill which would create a Senedd “recall” system, allowing voters to remove politicians between elections.

Mr Bain welcomed plans to appoint “lay” members for the first time to the standards committee, which makes sanctions recommendations based on his investigations.

He told Senedd Members: “There must always be a perception that members are entirely marking their own homework and I think the inclusion of independent, suitably qualified members will guard against that, at least to some extent.”

But he expressed concerns about former Senedd Members being eligible to join the committee only two years after standing down or not being returned at an election.

‘Conflict’

Giving evidence to a newly formed Senedd accountability committee, set up to scrutinise the bill, he said: “I recommended that the period should be four years.

“I think there could well be, after just two years, individuals who had worked closely with the member whose conduct was being considered.

“Even if they were totally unbiased in their approach, I think it sends the wrong signal to the public who might perceive that they had some sort of interest in the matter.”

Mr Bain added: “My own view is a period of four years would remove any reasonable concerns that the person might have inside knowledge of the case under investigation.”

He suggested there would be “no realistic risk” of a conflict of interest after four years and “of course, if there was a conflict it would be up to the member to recuse themselves anyway”.

‘Wrong message’

Meriel Singleton – clerk of the standards committee, which made recommendations to the Welsh Government on accountability, echoed the commissioner’s concerns.

“The committee is of the view that it should be longer than two years,” she said. “But, at the moment, it’s in line with what the standards commissioner’s qualification is.”

Hannah Blythyn, who chairs the committee, added: “If you change one, you change both.”

Under the bill, recall would be subject to a Senedd vote or automatically triggered in the case of a politician receiving a custodial or suspended sentence of 12 months or less. Sentences of more than 12 months already lead to disqualification.

Mr Bain was against other misconduct, such as harassment, automatically triggering recall.

“I think it would send entirely the wrong message,” he told Senedd Members. “Each case has to be looked at on its individual facts and an appropriate penalty or sanction imposed.”

On moving the threshold to six months, as proposed in Scotland, he said sentences for “almost identical offences vary widely from court to court and judge to judge”.

‘Unsavoury’

He told the accountability committee: “Whatever period is imposed is going to be arbitrary.”

Asked about appeals dragging on for months, Mr Bain said: “You can’t discount the possibility that the member concerned might attempt and might be successful in spinning out the process. We’ve certainly seen that in relation to the complaints process.”

He added: “Those of you who were here in the fifth Senedd will recall the very unsavoury tactics from a member which avoided any sanction being imposed on him.”

Mr Bain, who is barred from commenting on open cases, warned the rules governing his office are “well past their sell-by date” and out of kilter with Westminster. “What the public expects and are entitled to has moved on,” he said.

The commissioner said he would envisage new “own-initiative” powers being rarely used to launch investigations without first requiring a complaint as in other parliaments.

‘Condoned’

He said: “In the seven years of working in the Senedd, I can think of only two occasions on which I would have considered using this power had it been available.

“Both of these were alleged misconduct that had been widely reported… and I think it sends the wrong signal to the public when they read of that and no action is taken…

“Much to my surprise not a single person made a complaint about either of the incidents, perhaps assuming someone else was going to do that. The result was that – as far as the public was concerned – the Senedd condoned what had happened.”

Huw Williams, the Senedd’s chief legal adviser, backed the commissioner’s calls to introduce a new offence, saying: “As a result of experience in an earlier case, we think it would be useful to introduce a formal offence of obstructing the commissioner in his work.

“And there is a reported case where there was an attempt to interfere with witnesses.”