Accountability in the Commons

There are several bodies and documents which hold MPs to account:

  • A code of conduct which sets the rules MPs have to follow (MPs are also meant to follow a behaviour code.)

  • The parliamentary commissioner for standards, who carries out investigations into breaches of the rules and recommends sanctions to the Committee on Standards

  • The Commons Standards Committee which oversees the commissioner and decides sanctions in more serious cases

  • An independent complaints scheme for cases of bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct (which is separate the Standards Committee.)

  • A separate process for complaints about MPs’ expenses through a body named ‘IPSA’

Ministerial standards are governed by different rules and processes, including the ministerial code and the independent adviser on ministerial interests.

What are the rules that MPs have to abide by?

The Code of Conduct was originally approved in 1996 and, in theory, is reviewed every Parliament. However, this is somewhat aspirational and doesn’t always happen: most recent iteration was agreed in 2023. The Code incorporates other things as well as the Nolan Principles: broad rules of conduct, more detailed rules on interests, Behaviour Code, information about the Oath of allegiance to the King and a Guide to the Rules which explain how the Code should be interpreted.

The Code applies to all Members in all aspects of their public life but does not seek to regulate what members do in their purely private/personal lives. The Behaviour Code which now applies to MPs, does now cover issues of bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct.


The Code of Conduct does not regulate how MPs deal with constituents or set minimum standards of performance as an MP – this is to ensure that complaints cannot be raised by constituents who are unhappy with the way their MP has voted, or don’t like an EDM their MP has tabled. Although many complaints are made to the Commissioner along these lines, they are all rejected straight away.

The Code of Conduct is inspired and informed by the Seven Principles of Public Life, set by the Committee on Standards in Public Life (selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership). The Code of Conduct sets rules on handling conflicts of interest, registering and declaring interests and prohibits MPs from accepting any bribe to influence their conduct as MPs. The Guide to the Rules relating to the Conduct of Members sets out “in more detail what is required of Members in order to abide by the Code”. MPs also have to observe the principles (of respect, professionalism, understanding others’ perspectives, courtesy and acceptance of responsibility) set out in the parliamentary Behaviour Code.

The Behaviour Code is as follows:

·  Whether you are a visitor or working in Parliament at Westminster or elsewhere, there are clear guidelines in place on how you should be treated, and how you should treat others:

·   Respect and value everyone – bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct are not tolerated If you have experienced bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct, you are encouraged to report it and/or seek support

·  Recognise your power, influence or authority and don’t abuse them

·       Think about how your behaviour affects others and strive to understand their perspective

·       Act professionally towards others

·       Ensure Parliament meets the highest ethical standards of integrity, courtesy and mutual respect

·       Speak up about any unacceptable behaviour you see

Who investigates complaints about MPs’ conduct?

Who investigates complaints about MPs’ conduct?

The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is responsible for conducting investigations into breaches of the code of conduct. They cannot investigate any alleged misconduct in the Commons chamber, complaints about an MP’s views or opinions, the way an MP handles casework or the misuse of parliamentary expenses.

The commissioner is an independent officer of the House of Commons, appointed by MPs following nomination by the House of Commons Commission (a committee, led by the Speaker, which is responsible for the administration of the Commons). The commissioner reports to the Committee on Standards. The current commissioner, Daniel Greenberg, was appointed for a five-year term in January 2023.

The commissioner begins investigations of their own initiative or in response to complaints or self-referral by MPs. Investigations are conducted on a confidential basis. During the 2022–23 parliamentary session more than 5,600 complaints were made and 14 investigations were launched. The vast majority of complaints were dismissed as out of the scope of the commissioner, with 1,200 concerning conduct in the chamber – a matter for the Speaker – and more than 2,000 being the responsibility of another body.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is:

  1. Independent

  2. Appointed for five years

  3. In post for five years (non-renewable)

  4. An Officer of the House

  5. Their role is to maintain the Registers, give confidential advice on registration, advise the Standards Committee and individual Members on the Code and on propriety, monitor the Code and Registers and make recommendations to the Committee, and conduct investigations.

Investigations of allegations

Anyone can make a complaint to the Commissioner, but they do not have a blanket power to investigate – only in certain circumstances – so many complaints fall at the first hurdle. If the Commissioner decides it is within their remit to investigate a complaint, in the first instance they will do so via correspondence. There may also be a hearing, or the Commissioner may meet the parties individually.

If there is not enough evidence for the complaint to be upheld, the complaint is rejected. If there is sufficient evidence, there are two possible outcomes:

Rectification: The Commissioner reaches an agreement with the MP in question: for example, the MP agrees to apologise and repay any incorrectly claimed money. A statement is then published on the Commissioner’s website, explaining the outcome and confirming that the end of the process has been reached.

Memorandum to the Committee: for more serious cases, the Commissioner issues a Memorandum to the Committee on Standards to report her findings. The Committee then recommends to the House what, if any, action should be taken.

Certain topical issues greatly affect the number of complaints received by the Commissioner’s office. For example, during the EU Referendum campaign, there were complaints about MPs breaching the Nolan Principle of ‘honesty’. However, an allegation of a breach of a Nolan Principle alone is not sufficient reason for the Commissioner to conduct an investigation.

The Commissioner also has ‘Own Initiative’ powers; he can’t go on fishing expeditions, but if they are made aware of something which they thinks has sufficient evidence, they can start investigating the issue. However, this is a power that they uses sparingly.

Generally, those who are most likely to succeed in making an allegation are usually another Member, a journalist or someone who is politically active as they’re more aware of what the rules are and, arguably, have more motivation. Although the Commissioner doesn’t look at the motivation behind a complaint, he can decide not to investigate something if he thinks it’s particularly vexatious.

How do MPs oversee these investigations?

How do MPs oversee these investigations?

The commissioner only has the authority to punish minor breaches of the code, such as an accidental delay in reporting a financial interest. This usually involves an MP making an apology to the Commons or correcting the record.

In cases of more serious wrongdoing, the commissioner sends their report to the Commons select committee on standards. The Standards Committee is made up of seven MPs and seven non-parliamentarians (or ‘lay members’) who are appointed by MPs following nomination by the House of Commons Commission. Non-voting lay members were introduced in 2012 and were intended to make the standards process more robust in the wake of the expenses scandal; they were given the power to take part in committee votes in 2019.

The Standards Committee determines whether there has been a breach of the code and, if so, what sanctions ought to be imposed. The committee can impose some sanctions of its own authority, such as requiring a written apology or requiring an MP attend training. More serious sanctions – like suspending an MP – must be approved by the House of Commons itself. MPs agreed in October 2022 that votes on the committee’s reports would be taken without debate or amendment – a change intended to avoid a repeat of the controversial vote on the report into the conduct of Owen Paterson.

Since 2022, MPs have been able to appeal any decisions of the Standards Committee to the Independent Expert Panel, which is made up of eight members drawn from outside of parliament and appointed by MPs, again, following nomination by the House of Commons Commission. In these cases, the panel makes their report to the House of Commons directly. The panel has heard (and dismissed) three such appeals since gaining this power.

How does the process differ in cases of bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct?

Allegations of harassment, bullying or sexual misconduct are made through the Independent Complaints and Grievances Scheme (ICGS), which was introduced in 2018, as opposed to the parliamentary commissioner for standards. The ICGS is used to handle complaints against anyone who works on the parliamentary estate, but the process differs for MPs.

All ICGS investigations are conducted by an independent investigator, appointed from outside parliament by the ICGS team. In the case of MPs, the findings of the investigator are sent to the parliamentary commissioner for standards who reviews the evidence and checks the accuracy of the report. The commissioner can raise objections on factual grounds. The commissioner agrees or rejects the recommendations of the independent investigator and determines sanctions in less serious cases. 

The commissioner refers more serious cases of bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct involving MPs to the Independent Expert Panel, which makes a decision on the report and decides on sanctions. The panel was established in 2020 after a 2018 report into the harassment of House of Commons staff recommended that MPs should play no role in the ICGS. Prior to the panel's establishment, the Standards Committee determined these cases.

Much like the Standards Committee, the Independent Expert Panel can impose certain sanctions on its own authority, including requiring a written apology or attendance of training. More serious sanctions must be referred for decision in the Commons chamber. These sanctions are voted on without debate and have been since the body was established.

Who investigates complaints about MPs’ expenses?

Investigations into the misuse of expenses are conducted by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority’s (IPSA) compliance officer and not by the parliamentary commissioner for standards. While funded by the IPSA board, the compliance officer is operationally independent and appointed from outside the organisation. The compliance officer has the power to direct an MP to repay expenses that have been improperly claimed.

The compliance officer has, in the past, referred complaints to the Metropolitan Police where they suspect a criminal offence has been committed.