Fears that Nigel Farage could face a “kangaroo court” over his parliamentary standards case have intensified after GB News uncovered political and immigration-related links involving members of the panel that could ultimately judge him.
The committee is made up of seven Members of Parliament, as well as seven lay members, who will ultimately determine the Reform UK leader’s fate if sanctions are recommended by the Standards Commissioner.
Mehmuda Mian, one of the seven lay members of the Standards Committee, is a trustee of Slough Refugee Support.
She was appointed as a trustee in August 2024, according to the Charity Commission.
The organisation provides support to refugees and asylum seekers, including assistance with immigration and asylum matters.
Slough Refugee Support explicitly criticised the Conservative Government’s Rwanda plan back in 2022 in the register of charities, stating: “We are also concerned about the increasingly hostile attitude towards refugees encapsulated by the recent decision by the government to send ‘illegal’ refugees to Rwanda.”
Another lay member, former Scottish chief pharmaceutical officer Rose Marie Parr, has previously spoken publicly about her opposition to Brexit.
Asked in 2018 whether she was worried about Britain leaving the European Union, Ms Parr said: “Scotland didn’t vote for Brexit.
Mehmuda Mian (Left) and Rose Marie Parr (Right) sit on the committee investigating Nigel Farage
|
UK GOVERNMENT/SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT/PA
“It doesn’t want to be in this position.”
While these revelations do not explicitly establish opinions of the two lay members about Mr Farage himself, the findings raise fresh questions about whether the committee can be seen as genuinely politically neutral when considering a case involving him.
Barrister and legal expert Stephen Barrett said: “Any competent lawyer can see these processes are unjust.
“These are committees of cronies.
The Reform UK party leader won last week’s Clacton by-election
|
REUTERS“It was exactly the same with Boris: I called out that kangaroo court and I call out this kangaroo court too.
“These show trials shame Parliament; the modern experiment in ‘independent’ standards systems has become rotten and itself is a disgrace to Parliament.
The very idea is absurd… MPs are accountable to voters, not the opinions of a sheltered elite, fulfilling non-jobs on public money.”
The current investigation into Mr Farage concerns a £5million donation from businessman Christopher Harborne, which he has maintained was a personal gift.
But if the Standards Commissioner finds against the newly re-elected Clacton MP, who has denied any wrongdoing, it is the committee that will decide his punishment, which could lead to yet another by-election.
This comes after the People’s Channel previously exposed MPs on the Standards Committee who had expressed unfavourable views about Mr Farage, raising questions over the impartiality of the body investigating him.
This included Liberal Democrat MP Anna Sabine, who criticised Mr Farage for taking a salary from GB News, branding it a “conflict of interest”, as well as Labour MP Michael Wheeler, who was amongst a group of MPs who signed a letter referring Reform UK to the Equality and Human Rights Commission for alleged Islamophobia.
The Standards Committee is governed by rules, including the “Seven Principles of Public Life” from the MPs’ Code of Conduct, which states: “Holders of public office must act and take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias.”
Members are expected to comply with these rules, regardless of their political position or any prior criticism of members under investigation.
A Standards Committee spokesman said it was “unable to comment on the comments of members”, but clarified it is the Commissioner conducting the investigation.
They also pointed out lay members are recruited through open and fair competition, come from diverse backgrounds and possess significant external regulatory experience.
Britain’s News Channel contacted Ms Mian, Ms Marie Parr and all four MPs named from the original report for comment.