Former Labour MP and minister Keith Vaz breached parliament’s bullying and harassment coverage, an investigation by its requirements watchdog has discovered.
The Impartial Professional Panel mentioned his actions in direction of former Commons clerk Jenny McCullough “represented sustained and unsightly bullying” that had a “actual and enduring psychological impression” and led to the complainant leaving her position within the Commons.
On her account, the impact of the Respondent’s behaviour was to undermine the Complainant and rob her of confidence in her judgment and talents, in order that in the end she felt compelled to go away her work within the Home of Commons,” the report famous.
“The respondent’s conduct to the complainant was hostile, sustained, dangerous and unworthy of a Member of Parliament,” it additionally mentioned.
“He ought to be ashamed of his behaviour.”
The allegations associated to Mr Vaz’s conduct in direction of Ms McCullough between July 2007 and October 2008, when he was chair of the House Affairs Choose Committee and she or he was its second clerk.
She agreed to be recognized within the panel’s report.
Mr Vaz stood down as MP for Leicester East on the 2019 common election, having represented the constituency since 1987.
The panel mentioned that had he held a Commons move as a former MP, “we’d have decided that it was applicable to take away that move”.
It added: “As issues are, we decide that eligibility to carry a former Member’s move ought to by no means be restored.”
The report mentioned Mr Vaz initially engaged with the panel’s investigator – however previous to a scheduled interview in September 2020 he knowledgeable the commissioner that he was “not nicely sufficient to have interaction additional with the investigation”.
“She [the commissioner] concluded, after looking for additional medical stories, that she ought to instruct the investigator to convey their investigation to a conclusion with out interviewing the Respondent.”
The panel’s report mentioned it had obtained “important communication” from Mr Vaz’s medical adviser, in addition to his sister, and “the thrust of those communications was to emphasize that the Respondent was too unwell to participate within the sub-panel’s proceedings, and, by inference, that due to this fact they need to be deserted”.
However the report concluded: “Following a assessment of publicly accessible materials demonstrating the Respondent’s ongoing public media and political exercise, the sub-panel concluded that it didn’t doubt that the Respondent has well being issues, however that there was no good foundation for concluding these well being issues preclude him from engagement with the Panel, if solely in writing.”