Speaker: MP’s code of conduct will need force of law
(CNS): Speaker Alden McLaughlin has called for legislation to support a proposed voluntary code of conduct for MPs that he hopes will be accepted by them all before this parliament ends next year. McLaughlin said that members were now close to consensus on the code, which has been under consideration for at least three years, since the main stumbling block — who should adjudicate complaints — may have been resolved. He said the Standards in Public Life Commission has agreed to take on that role, creating an independent body.
“I really believe it would be an important legacy of this term of this parliament for us to leave behind a code of conduct,” he said. If the SPLC did agree, it would alleviate the concerns about “the majority using the code to beat the minority” as it will be an independent body looking at the complaints.
The speaker said he believed the conduct would need to be supported by law. “I believe it is important if and when, prayerfully, a code of conduct is agreed, it is given the force of law,” he said. “Obviously, any other parliament may change any law but I do not believe some voluntary code is going to be sufficient. I think whatever we agree needs to have the force of law behind it.”
He asked Premier Juliana O’Connor-Connolly, who he knew was listening, as well as the acting premier and the leader of the opposition to consider that issue. McLaughlin said he was hopeful there was some impetus to now get things done.
Responding to questions from McKeeva Bush (WBW), who blamed the opposition for stalling the agreement and signing of the code, McLaughlin told him that the opposition had not accepted the code that government members had signed because the original proposal did not have an independent body to deal with the complaints.
But if that was to be resolved by the SPLC taking on the job, a new draft would be circulated to members to sign and give this parliament a lasting legacy.
See below the original letter sent to then-premier Wayne Panton by Opposition Leader Roy McTaggart outlining the PPM concerns over the code of conduct.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: Politics
The Speaker is right that the Code of Conduct should have the force of law ultimately but if the Members of Parliament cant agree on a voluntary code how will they pass any with the force of law?!
Of course it cannot be forgotten that the Speaker led a Government in which the then Speaker should have been made to resign. You know like Panton made him resign.
At least Panton tried to get a Parliamentary Code of Conduct in place. I understand that he made the Government members sign one.
Also I believe it is correct that there was no Cabinet Manual and Cabinet Code of Conduct until Panton did it.
All good things to build on.
Even if they had force of law, the politicians would decide they did not apply to them and help each other out of any actions.
Kind of says it all really, – self admittedly there’s no faith that the highest ranking elected officials in the end will never have the principles, morals, or ethic code to act responsibly…
The speaker said he believed the conduct would need to be supported by law. “I believe it is important if and when, prayerfully, a code of conduct is agreed, it is given the force of law,” he said. “Obviously, any other parliament may change any law but I do not believe some voluntary code is going to be sufficient. I think whatever we agree needs to have the force of law behind it.”
The rest of Cayman doesn’t need to implicitly subscribe or quietly resign to their failing example, and can insist on a better standard, as the voters holding district electoral power.
Why is the speaker “Responding to questions”?
Because the government side does not understand the concept?
‘He asked Premier Juliana O’Connor-Connolly, who he knew was listening, as well as the acting premier and the leader of the opposition to consider that issue. McLaughlin said he was hopeful there was some impetus to now get things done.’
Says it all, they are listening! Prayerfully! LOL
“McLaughlin said the Opposition had not accepted the code that government members had signed because the original proposal did not have an independent body to deal with the complaints” Don’t overlook who was laying blame on the Opposition – he will probably be the first to break the law. I hope the law will contain jail time for non-compliance.
How do we reconcile the wide multi-regime conspiracy to hide $2.1 billion in liabilities from the FCO, with these cracker jack prize Nolan Principles? Surely some key underwriters of this fraud would need to be expelled to demonstrate that crimes against public trust don’t pay? Crickets from our $200mln a year policing apparatus.
10;46 Rubbish. Nothing is being hidden. The fact that you know the amount is proof enough.
Nolan principles also apply to the Ministers puppets appointed to government boards. But everyone seems to forget that.
It’s not being properly reported on the Balance Sheet that the Financial Secretary is signing off on, and handing over to the FCO to retain FFR status. It’s accounting fraud. Even in the UK, KYD$2,100,000,000 is a pretty big omission! Talking about forged accounting doesn’t clean it.
As an example of the current level of respect for the law, changes to the rules applying to the appointment of Justices of the Peace are going through Parliament today which will, for the first time, permit convicted criminals to be appointed as Justices of the Peace and to potentially act in a judicial capacity.
https://legislation.gov.ky/cms/images/LEGISLATION/BILLS/2024/2024-0002/SummaryJurisdictionAmendmentBill2024.pdf
You do realise that the bill was not just published today. If you had an issue, you should have commented during the consultation period.
It would not have made any difference as that aspect was obvious and perhaps was the intent
Well, it was the well thinking Caymanian electorate that voted for criminals in the first place.
No serving MP or senior public servant can warehouse the belief that they can willingly opt-out of the Nolan Principles that are embedded in the Standard in Public Life Law from 2021. They are already bound to these seven principles, and the reciprocal obligations to expel those that don’t uphold the explicit standards. Crossing fingers behind your back, doesn’t void the pledge. Those that violate the 7 principals can’t be in public life any more. They need to be expelled. Simple as that. The public of the Cayman Islands is yet to see it in action, especially from the PPM!!!
Were it so – No serving MP or senior public servant is in reality bound by the Nolan Principles – or much else. They simply would not stand for it and there is no mechanism for holding any of them to account in practice.
There is a Governor that might insist on that accountability: that liability provisions be restored and fortified, with power and budget to supervising agencies. It’s particularly urgent, given the disclosed history of manipulating the balance sheet to fit the UK’s Framework for Fiscal Responsibility, and OAG’s decade of adverse opinions on the accounts of the entire civil service. Has our Governor/FCO not read the same reporting as us? It is written in plain English, with admissions from the still-serving Financial Secretary!
I cannot see this bunch of politicians accepting any limitation on their conduct that is meaningful. Even the Cabinet Code of Conduct only requires them to comply with those aspects of criminal law that they personally think is ‘relevant’ to them. See section 2.4
https://www.gov.ky/content/published/api/v1.1/assets/CONTE1842E8060284A7BAAB829A1F7043D05/native?cb=_cache_9cd6&channelToken=ba101c823c0441f7930b759758ea3e6f
Since when are the Nolan Principles voluntary?
Since they entered the territory of the Cayman Islands – which was some time after the word ‘Honourable’ lost any meaning in a political context.
Sir Alden, do we not keep proving that laws around here are voluntary? They are certainly not equally enforced whether it comes to practicing Cayman law without a practising certificate, paying pensions, or driving into light poles. From GasBoy to certain status grants we seem to be without effective remedy. What is this “force of law” to which you refer?
Will Sir Alden do the honorable thing and take responsibility for his unlawful policies that have and still are causing detrimental harm to these Islands?
The Speaker is not entirely wrong about the code of conduct. However, the irony that this is coming from him quite hypocritically, but the message is not wrong (only that the messenger is tainted).
Is this some anti-vax nutter writing in?