I chose not to support the amendment today.
Wanting to discuss the rights and wrongs of Mr Paterson’s suspension is legitimate. As is wanting to discuss the way in which our standards system works. But it is absolutely wrong to conflate the two issues as happened today. This gave the impression of a special process for one individual.
Whatever one thought of Mr Paterson’s inquiry, due process had been followed. Whatever one thinks of the need for reform, this was not the cross party considered manner in which to do it. Moreover, these matters have traditionally been declared business of the House and decided on a free vote basis for several years. It would have been right to do so today, rather than whipping MPs.
Therefore, I chose to abstain on this amendment as it was not consistent with the highest standards of public life which it is essential we uphold, if MPs are to be respected and enjoy public trust.