A number of former party whips have argued that a ‘professional’ HR system should be brought into parliament to deal with misconduct allegations against MPs.
Currently, any accusations against MPs are dealt with on a case-by-case basis, and there is no single authority in Westminster that would deal with, for example, a complaint of sexual harassment.
Whips, who tend to be senior MPs, look after discipline and welfare within their respective parties, as well as ensuring MPs vote on important matters. They are often also the first port of call if there is a case of misconduct.
The calls for a parliament HR department come as MPs meet today (12 June) to discuss proposed new rules that would exclude MPs who have been accused of sexual misconduct or violent offences.
One former chief whip told the BBC that “there should be a better HR system for the employment of members’ staff”.
“Although they are the appointment of the minister, they are centrally employed, and come under the HR umbrella of the rest of the civil service,” they added, wishing to remain anonymous.
Parliament HR issues
MPs call for parliament HR department
Angela Rayner: Scandal highlights inaction to prevent harassment at work
“That would give [staff] the protection of being able to speak to somebody else other than their employer, where it might be a very small office. So their employer is not necessarily the member of parliament, but the House authorities.”
Parliament does have an Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme and allegations are also sometimes brought to the police, but there is no formally approved route.
Former deputy chief whip Anne Milton said she had been involved with allegations against Charlie Elphicke, who was suspended from the Conservative party after reports of sexual assault were referred to the police. He was later jailed for two years.
She told the BBC: “You need a process that should be handled by an external organisation, who are professionals, to investigate allegations swiftly”, adding that she felt the whips’ role was more to get government business through parliament than deal with staffing issues.
“Trying to crack the nut of MPs acting like small businesses is quite a difficult nut to crack. But using an external agency to resolve workplace issues is not difficult,” she added.
“Neither parliament nor the whips’ offices are equipped to do it. This is highly specialised stuff. The whips shouldn’t be enacting sanctions as part of the complaints process. It may be considered prudent by a political party to withdraw the whip pending an investigation.”
Another MP said: “I do think there’s a benefit in more HR support for MPs – I’m not an HR expert.” MPs being able to hire their own staff meant that whips were often having to deal with a culture like that of “650 small businesses”, they added.
In May 2022, House of Commons speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle said “radical action” was needed urgently to stamp out inappropriate behaviour in Westminster, and called for an outside body that employed staff independently.
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
And in 2019, an independent inquiry by Gemma White QC recommended that MPs should follow the same employment practices and procedures as other public sector workforces, with a centralised body acting in a similar way to an HR department.
