Boris Johnson U-turns on controversial review of Owen Paterson's lobbying suspension

Commons Leader Jacob Rees-Mogg said he would seek “cross-party” changes to the system after Labour and other opposition parties refused to take part in a “corrupt committee”.

And he suggested any changes may not “apply retrospectively” after the Government came under intense criticism for blocking Owen Paterson’s immediate suspension.

Mr Rees-Mogg’s announcement to MPs came as an ethics adviser to the Prime Minister described Wednesday’s votes as a “very serious and damaging moment for Parliament”.

Lord Evans, the chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, said plans for a Tory-led review into the disciplinary process for MPs as being “deeply at odds with the best traditions of British democracy”.

The Commons Leader recognised that standards must be reformed on a cross-party basis as he acknowledged “that is clearly not the case” with the Government’s proposals.

“While there is a very strong feeling on both sides of the House that there is a need for an appeals process, there is equally a strong feeling that this should not be based on a single case or apply retrospectively,” Mr Rees-Mogg said.

“I fear last night’s debate conflated an individual case with the general concern. This link needs to be broken.

“Therefore I and others will be looking to work on a cross-party basis to achieve improvements in our system for future cases. We will bring forward more detailed proposals once there have been cross-party discussions.”

Shadow Commons leader Thangam Debbonaire said she was “frankly astonished” by Mr Rees-Mogg’s suggestion to separate “the process of reviewing the standards process from an individual case”.

She added: “There is no separating retrospectively. He has made much of the fact that this Government doesn’t want to do retrospective rule change, so I am frankly astonished by him.”

Ms Debbonaire parroted Mr Rees-Mogg’s words from past business questions, saying: “MPs, holders of public office. We are not employees. We are subject to professional self-regulation not employment law, but if they want… to be treated as employees of this House rather than office-holders then alongside all the other employees they should be wearing masks around the estate and in this chamber.”

The Labour MP went on to ask how the proposed new standards committee voted for by the Government would be paid for because it would cost more taxpayer cash, which she said she knew the Commons leader “dislikes intensely”.

Read more:

How Yorkshire MPs voted on preventing Owen Paterson's suspension