Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
It is Owen Paterson’s argument that the Investigating Committee got its facts wrong and he was not, in fact, given the ability to correct them. He says he has not been listened to. Given that this point has been made, don’t you think that there should be a pause to consider whether there is a need to establish an appeal right?
|
Chris Bryant, who is the chair of the committee, has said they did indeed give him a chance to correct them
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...IS-BRYANT.html
Quote:
Today the House will consider a report from my committee on the conduct of Owen Paterson, the former cabinet minister and Tory MP for North Shropshire.
We gave him every chance to put his case to us, in writing and in person. We read and published all his witness statements. He had a fair hearing.
|
As does the report itself
https://committees.parliament.uk/com...n-paterson-mp/
Quote:
|
This last year must have been very distressing for him and we have taken these circumstances fully into account in considering Mr Paterson’s conduct during the period of the investigation”, and recorded that it had “striven to ensure that Mr Paterson has had every opportunity to represent himself as fully as possible before the Committee, in person and in writing. We have extended deadlines at his request and we have accepted his request to be accompanied by his legal advisers and to make a formal opening statement to us”.
|
Quote:
|
Mr Paterson made a number of arguments and allegations about the process followed in this case. The Committee addressed each of Mr Paterson’s arguments in detail in the report and set out its reasons for rejecting them.
|