UK commissioner clears Lord
(CNS): The UK House of Lords Commissioner for Standards has dismissed a complaint made about the director of the Cayman Islands London office, Lord Blencathra. In a letter sent to the British Conservative peer who was appointed to represent Cayman’s interests in the UK and Europe, Paul Kernaghan said he was satisfied that the member of the House of Lords had not breached its code of conduct. A copy of the letter dismissing the complaint and a press release was issued on Sunday evening by the Ministry of Finance some four days after a CNS news report that Cayman’s UK representative had been the subject of an enquiry as a result of the appointment.
In May Lord Blencathra released documents that he had sent to the commissioner and a letter stating that no complaints had been made about him in connection with his Cayman appointment. However, in July Paul Flyn MP filed a complaint and an enquiry was opened, though neither Blencathra nor the finance ministry revealed that information to the Cayman public.
An article in the Bureau of Investigative Journalism in the UK, published 2 October, indicated that a complaint had been filed and the Tory peer was, after all, the subject of a House of Lords probe. On 4 October CNS confirmed with the commissioner’s clerk in London that an investigation was in progress and the commissioner would file his report in due course. But he said he was unable to reveal any of the details as the enquiry was still underway.
In his letter to Lord Blencathra, which was dated 27 September, Kernaghan said that he had found that the member was not providing parliamentary advice or services to the Cayman Islands Government Office so he was not in breach. He stated that a report would be given to the sub-committee shortly but that he felt Blencathra would wish to know his decision as soon as possible.
Related articles:
UK Lord is focus of probe (4 October 2012)
No complaint about UK lord (26 June 2012)
Category: Politics
Now, what were you ass @@@@s saying? why is it you all have to jump on any issues that has to do with our way of governship…. and our Premier.
All who made those stupid remarks in regards to Mr. Blencathra, must now feel like shit. And you think you are intelligent and educated.
Cha! I hope unna trip and pop ya mout.
So that's alright, then. Apart from the fact that he was illegally appointed by the Premier, acting in his own discretion, to a civil service post governed by the Public Service Management Law which does not allow appointments of this kind by a politician. Oh, but I forgot, this law, like others, does not apply to the Premier.
Those are issues of local law of the Cayman Islands. These do not appear to be relevant to the national law and parliamentary procedures of the UK and would not impact upon this investigation.
Yes I knew that, "Sir Richard", when I made my original post. The point is we in Cayman should be worrying about Mac's flaunting of the local PSML much more than we should about Lord Whatsits' issues with the UK Parliament.
The UK have got to clear this upfor me ! How can a sitting member of parliament (and what was the committee that he sat on? you know the one with the glaring conflict of interest) who is already paid to represent his own constituency be working full time for a whole other country?? If this is the case , then the UK needs to look at their code of conduct, conflict of interest and anti- lobbying laws. Clean up in your own house first.
Commonwealth countries please note that if you are bringing accountability, transparency and anti-corruption experts to help update your countries laws, policies AND procedures they should NOT be from the UK Government.
Given that you believe a sitting life peer "is already paid to represent his own constituency" it is clear that you know nothing about the operation of the UK constitution. Therefore I suggest you limit your views to something you know about.
Cayman is not a "whole other country". It is an overseas territory of the UK which should technically be represented in the UK Parliament.
The letter dealt with UK issues, not those of the Cayman Islands. The people who should be making a noise about this are the Civil Service Association. We know how good THEY are at hysterical, nutty letters.
The Civil Service Association are only interested in their pay packet from what I can tell.
This is how due process works! So, for the umpteenth time….! What is the status if the 3 investigations into the Premier?? It’s been years now so is the Stan Thomas matter time barred as at Oct 2012?
Where is the detail of the third other investigation?
Where is the investigation into thevPremier interference into the admitted release of illegal explosives? Is he still releasing his developer friends explosive shipments?
By getting rid of Brian Tomilinson, we will not know if anyone is paying attention to these matters
What is going on?
Come on Caymanians…this is pathetic representation. Don’t you think you deserve better quality melas than this lot of rubbish?
My guess is that the status of those investigations are similar to that of the "investigation" of video captured auction / bribery of "access" to the British Prime Minister (David Cameron) to the tune of £250,000.00.
It is simply the British way, my friend. As we are constantly reminded on this forum – we are merely a British overseas territory.
Surely you don't expect us to show "mommy" how it ought to be done, do you?
There was nothing to investigate in this example which Whodatis drags up as often as the British Indian Ocean Territories. Over the last year or so many many Americans have paid large sums to dine with or meet Mssrs. Obama and Romney. That this was happening on a much lesser scale in the UK was all that was "exposed" by the story in question, and all the political parties in the UK behaved the same way. There was no suggestion that there was any influence on policy. So why don't you get off your high horse and spend a little time on Planet Earth? It is disappointing that a half-Brit is so misguided and hateful towards the land of his parent.
Re: