mrs linda riordan mp: resolution letter - uk parliament · invitation from mrs linda riordan mp . 3...

1 Complaints rectified 2008-09

Mrs Linda Riordan MP: Resolution Letter

Letter to Councillor Stephen Baines from the Commissioner, 17 December 2008

I have now concluded my consideration of the complaint you sent me on 20 July about Mrs Linda Riordan MP’s apparent use of Parliamentary stationery and postage to send party political material to her constituents contrary to the rules of the House.

I have consulted Mrs Riordan and the House authorities about this matter.

Mrs Riordan has told me that the use of House of Commons stationery and pre-paid envelopes for the two despatches you sent me was not intentional on her part. It was caused by an error made by volunteers in her office. She has apologised for the mistakes made and she has taken action to ensure there is no recurrence. She has met the costs of the stationery and postage used1. The cost of Mrs Riordan’s Parliamentary Report for July 2008 which you sent to me was not met from Parliamentary resources.

I consider that Mrs Riordan has made the appropriate rectification in response to this complaint. I therefore consider the complaint now closed. I will report the outcome to the House of Commons Committee on Standards and Privileges.

Thank you for raising this matter with me.

I am copying this letter to Mrs Linda Riordan MP.

17 December 2008

1 £106.


Mrs Linda Riordan MP: Written Evidence

1. Letter to the Commissioner from Councillor Stephen Baines, 20 July 2008

I attach a copy of a letter sent on 22nd May by Linda Riordan MP on House of Commons letterhead and postage paid envelope to a Halifax constituent who wishes to remain anonymous. This is obviously a calling notice for a meeting for political purposes and is against the rules covering the Communications Allowance and the use of House Stationery.

I also attach a Parliamentary report posted on 9th July that included a request to join a fund raising club to finance her expenses at the next General Election that is also in breach of the rules.

Would you please investigate the use of tax payers funds to finance these examples of literature sent by the MP for Halifax?

20 July 2008

2. Invitation from Mrs Linda Riordan MP


3. Mrs Linda Riordan MP’s Parliamentary Report, July 2008


4. Invitation to 100 Club from Mrs Linda Riordan MP


5. Letter to Mrs Linda Riordan MP from the Commissioner, 29 July 2008

I would welcome your comments on a complaint I have received from Councillor Stephen Baines about your alleged use of House of Commons stationery for what he considers to be party political purposes.


I attach copies of Mr Baines’ letter of 20 July and its enclosures, which comprised an invitation to a social event on 7 June 2008 and the House of Commons first-class pre-paid envelope in which it was said to be sent, and also your Parliamentary report for July 2008, a leaflet about the Constituency Labour Party 100 Club and the House of Commons first-class pre-paid envelope in which these were said to be sent.

In essence, the complaint is that you used House of Commons pre-paid envelopes and House of Commons stationery to write to constituents for party political purposes and on matters on which they had not contacted you, in breach of the rules for the use of such stationery.

Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct for Members provides as follows:

“Members shall at all times ensure that their use of expenses, allowances, facilities and services provided from the public purse is strictly in accordance with the rules laid down on these matters, and that they observe any limits placed by the House on the use of such expenses, allowances, facilities and services.”

The rules in relation to the House stationery are included in a booklet on the Communications Allowance and the use of House stationery published in April 2007. Paragraph 1.4 includes the following provision:

“... Neither the Communications Allowance nor House stationery, including pre paid envelopes, can be used for personal benefit or for party political activities or campaigning.”

The provisions for House of Commons paper and pre-paid envelopes are set out in Appendix Four to that booklet.

Paragraph 5 of Appendix Four deals with the use of the House emblem and includes the following:

“... The designs and symbols of the House should not be used for purposes to which such authentication is inappropriate, or where there is a risk that their use might wrongly be regarded, or represented, as having the authority of the House.”

Paragraph 6 of that Appendix provides as follows:

“In the course of a financial year, a Member is entitled to be provided free of charge with original House stationery to a value of up to £7, 000. This includes the cost of both the stationery itself and the cost of postage on pre-paid envelopes. Members may also purchase original House stationery (but not pre-paid envelopes) using their Incidental Expenses Provision.”

Paragraph 7 provides:

“Original House stationery, however it is acquired, should not, in any circumstances, be used for the following purposes: ... b) in connection with fund raising for the benefit of a political party, advocating membership of a political party, or supporting the return of any person to public office.”

Paragraph 9 provides:

“If you wish to use original House of Commons stationery to send to people on issues on which they have not previously contacted you, you must purchase it from the suppliers. Alternatively, you may photocopy stationery which includes the crowned portcullis and the words “House of Commons”. Such mail must comply with the rules set out in paragraph 7 and may not be sent using pre paid envelopes.”

Paragraphs 14 and 15 provide:

“14. Pre paid envelopes must not be used: ... c) in connection with fund-raising for the benefit of a political party or supporting the return of any person to public office ...


h) for correspondence with constituents on issues on which they have not previously contacted you or on which they have only contacted you at your own instigation. 15. Items which may not be sent in pre paid envelopes on their own, such as circulars, newsletters, cards and calendars, must not be attached to correspondence legitimately sent using pre-paid envelopes.”

The rules for the use of the Communications Allowance (CA) are set out in a new Section 6 of the Green Book included in Appendix One of the April 2007 publication. Paragraph 6.14.1 gives examples of expenditure allowable under the Communications Allowance, including:

• “Regular Reports or Newsletters • Targeted correspondence relating to issues of importance locally, including

o Contact with local groupings o Circulars o Questionnaires or surveys o Petitions

• Contact and surgery details, including advertisements.”

Paragraph 6.12.4 of the booklet says

“ ... You must not use your CA funded publications or websites: • for fund raising • to promote or campaign on behalf of any person seeking election • for the purpose of advancing perspectives or arguments with the intention of promoting the interests of

any political party or organization you support, or damaging the interests of any other such party or organization”.

Paragraphs 5,18 and 24 of Appendix 2 deal further with the content of publications funded by the CA:

5. “The following are not permitted: • Party political activities, including fundraising or membership drives

... 18. Your publication must include a short notice explaining that costs are to be met from the allowances, and giving the source of any other funding. 24. The content of publications should not seek, directly or indirectly, to compare a Member’s party favourably with another, promote one party at the expense of another or seek to undermine the reputations of political opponents. In this context, the selective use of statistics should also be avoided.”

In the light of the complaint and this summary of the rules, I would welcome your comments. In particular, it would be helpful to know:

1. the circumstances in which you came to use House of Commons notepaper for your invitation to your social event on 7 June, and House of Commons pre-paid envelopes both for that communication and for your Parliamentary report with the invitation to the Constituency Labour Party’s 100 Club;

2. whether your Parliamentary report and any of the other material sent in these two mailings was funded from the Communications Allowance;

3. how many envelopes and sheets of paper provided or funded by Parliament you used when you sent out your invitation to your social event; and how many you used when you sent out your Parliamentary report and 100 Club invitation;

4. whether you consider that you breached the rules in using pre-paid House of Commons envelopes for both these communications and House of Commons original notepaper for your social invitation;

5. whether you consider that your use of the House of Commons portcullis logo in your Parliamentary report was within the rules of the House;


6. whether you consider that either of these communications (the social event invitation or the circulation of the Parliamentary report) could have been funded from your Communications Allowance, or whether you accept the complainant’s view that these were party political activities on behalf of your party.

I would welcome any other comments you may wish to make.

I enclose a copy of a note setting out the procedure I follow when considering complaints. I have written to the complainant to let them know that I have accepted their complaint. If you would like a word about any of this, please get in touch with me at the House. I appreciate that we are in the recess, but I would be very grateful if it were possible to let me have a response within the next six weeks, although if you do need longer, please let me know.

29 July 2008

6. Letter to the Commissioner from Mrs Linda Riordan MP, 10 September 2008

I am writing in response to your letter of 29 July regarding the above subject.

I have noted your comments and can only apologise for the mistake. I had volunteers in my office and, in error, information regarding non parliamentary information was put into the wrong envelopes and posted out.

I can assure you that a more rigorous approach will be taken in the future to ensure there is no repeat. I am happy to pay for the cost of any stationery that was used in error, if you are agreeable to that course of action.

Once again I apologise unreservedly for this administrative mistake and will ensure the rules are adhered to in the future.

10 September 2008

7. Letter to Mrs Linda Riordan MP from the Commissioner, 18 September 2008

Thank you for your letter of 10 September responding to this complaint about your use of House of Commons stationery which I sent you on 29 July.

I will need to consult the House authorities about your letter before deciding how best it can be resolved, but before doing so, I would be very grateful if you could give me a little more information about the two dispatches which generated this complaint and which I covered in my earlier letter to you. In particular:

1. could you confirm that the House of Commons pre-paid envelopes used for both these letters and the House of Commons crested notepaper used for the invitation to your social event and the other paper used was funded from your provided stationery allowance. If not, could, you let me know from which Parliamentary account or accounts they were funded;

2. could you let me know how many invitations were sent out to the social in this way?

3. could you let me know whether your July 2008 Parliamentary Report was funded from the Communications Allowance (there is no funding imprint suggesting that it was);

4. whether you consider, in view of the content of your newsletter, the use of the House emblem was inappropriate in the light of the rule in paragraph 5 to Appendix Four of the rules published in April 2007 to which I referred in my previous letter;

5. how many pre-paid House of Commons envelopes from your provided stationery allowance were used to send out your July 2008 Parliamentary Report and if all such copies included the Labour Party 100 Club leaflet.

I am sorry to ask for this level of detail, but it is necessary in order to enable me to decide how best to resolve this matter. If you could let me have a reply within the next three weeks, or earlier if possible, that would be most helpful. Thank you for your help with this.


18 September2008

8. Letter to the Commissioner from Mrs Linda Riordan MP, 23 October 2008

Thank you for your letter of 18 September. Please find my answers to each of your questions, point by point, below.

1. Yes.

2. 125.

3. No.

4. For the general content of the newsletter, no. For the inclusion of the social and 100 club information then, on this occasion, a mistake was probably made.

5. Approximately 125. Yes.

In addition, I can assure you that such an error will not happen in the future and this was an accidental rather than deliberate misunderstanding of the rules that are rightly in place.

23 October 2008

9. Letter to the Director of Accommodation Services, Department of Facilities from the Commissioner, 27 October 2008

I would welcome your advice on a complaint I have received against Mrs Linda Riordan about her use of House of Commons pre-paid envelopes and House of Commons stationery to send a letter apparently to members of her party in her constituency inviting them to a social event and to send her privately-funded Parliamentary Report with a fundraising leaflet for her constituency party.

I attach [relevant evidence]

I would welcome your comments on this complaint and Mrs Riordan’s response to it. You will see that she has offered to pay the cost of the stationery that she used, and your advice on this and the sums involved would also be very welcome.

It would be most helpful if you could let me have a response to this letter within the next two weeks if that were possible. I am grateful for your help with this.

27 October 2008

10. Letter to the Commissioner from the Director of Accommodation Services, Department of Facilities, 6 November 2008

Thank you for your letter dated 27 October 2008, concerning a complaint against Mrs Linda Riordan on her usage of pre-paid envelopes and House of Commons stationery.

It is my opinion that Mrs Riordan has breached the regulations approved by the Members’ Estimate Committee in her use of the stationery and pre-paid envelopes involved as set out in your letter to her of 29 July. I see from the copy correspondence enclosed in your letter of 28 October, Mrs Riordan accepts that an accidental error was made; I think that it would be appropriate for Mrs Riordan to repay the cost of the stationery and pre-paid envelopes and have asked for an invoice to be raised for £105.86 and sent out to Mrs Riordan.

My office will be in contact with you again once we have been informed that the invoice has been settled.


6 November 2008

11. Letter to Ms Linda Riordan MP from the Commissioner, 12 November 2008

I have now heard from the Facilities Department about your responses to this complaint in respect of your use of House of Commons stationery for your non-Parliamentary business.

I attach a copy of a letter of 6 November from the Director of Accommodation Services in the Facilities Department. As you will see, the Director agrees with you that you have breached the House of Commons regulations in your use of stationery and pre-paid envelopes. He has sent you an invoice for £105.86 to meet the cost of the stationery you used.

I need now to consider the way forward with this complaint. It is open under Standing Order 150 of the House for me to use the rectification procedure in respect of certain complaints. This procedure enables me to resolve a complaint without me submitting a formal Memorandum to the Committee on Standards and Privileges. In such cases, I write to the complainant with my conclusions on the complaint, and inform the Committee informally of the outcome. But I would only use the rectification procedure where the Member has accepted that there has been a breach of the rules, has apologised, where there are not significant sums of money at issue and any Parliamentary funds have been repaid, and the mistake was inadvertent on the part of the Member.

Before I decide on the way forward, it would be helpful if you could let me know whether you would be content for me to use the rectification procedure in this case and to confirm that you have paid the invoice for the stationery and pre-paid envelopes which you used. If I were to take this course, I would tell the complainant that the use of House of Commons stationery and pre-paid envelopes for the two despatches was not intentional on your part; that you have taken action to ensure that there is no recurrence; that you have apologised and that you have met the cost of the stationery and postage used. I will also make clear that the cost of your Parliamentary Report was not met from Parliamentary resources.

I look forward to hearing from you.

12 November 2008

12. Letter to the Commissioner from Mrs Linda Riordan MP, 15 December 2008

Thank you for your letter of 12 November.

I am writing to confirm that I have accepted the rectification process and I have met the costs of postage and stationery accordingly and forwarded this payment on to the relevant department.

I can confirm that the relevant processes have been put in place in my office to ensure this unintentional mistake will not happen again in the future.

Once again, I apologise for the mistake that was made. I hope this draws a line under the issue.

15 December 2008

mrs linda riordan mp: resolution letter - uk parliament · invitation from mrs linda riordan mp . 3...

Documents