John Bercow under pressure after Parliament spend £2.4million to gag staff from ‘speaking out about misconduct claims’
PARLIAMENT spent £2.4 million to gag staff from speaking out about misconduct in the building over the last five years, bombshell figures have revealed.
Speaker John Bercow is under pressure after it was found that taxpayers footed the bill for 53 “gagging clauses” - an average of £45,500 each.
The revelations raise fresh questions over Parliament’s bullying culture that erupted around Mr Bercow after two of his ex-aides accused him of physically intimidating them.
Commons Leader Andrea Leadsom said she found the cost of the non-disclosure agreements “surprising” and exposed the need for new complaints procedure to root out Parliament’s bullies.
She said: “If any relate to the way an individual has been treated, it further highlights the importance of changing the culture in Westminster.
“It’s essential that anyone in Parliament who feels they have not been treated with dignity and respect should be able to achieve closure.
“The independent complaints and grievance procedure, which I hope will be implemented in the coming months, will help complainants achieve that by placing them at the heart of the process.
“I want all staff to be able to access the new process, to make parliament a better place to work.”
Mr Bercow is Chair of the House of Commons Commission, which is a body responsible for setting strategy, but doesn't have direct involvement in resolving employment disputes.
Eleven agreements were signed in 2013 costing a total of £916,082.43, with 14 in 2014 totalling £405,682.08, five in 2015 costing a total of £182,706.21 and 15 in 2016 coming to £584,893.00.
Last year, eight non-disclosure agreements were signed costing a total of £317,813.06.
Every settlement agreement included confidentiality clauses, Commons authorities confirmed, but said they do not prevent those who signed them from whistleblowing.
The Commons Womens and Equalities committee chairman Maria Miller called for “the use of gagging clauses to be made a thing of the past”.
MOST READ IN POLITICS
She said: “There needs to be as much transparency as there can be as to how this money is being used and why such a relatively large amount of money was needed to deal with severance agreements.”
Ms Miller added: “It can’t be the drawing up of the contracts, they wouldn’t cost that much to draw up, so it must be the amount of money that’s being paid out and salaries in the House of Commons are not enormous so that does seem to be a significant amount of money.
“There needs to be more transparency on why payments such as this are being made in the first place.”
On Thursday night the House of Commons confirmed Speaker Bercow had no direct involvement in the settlement arrangements.
A spokesman said: “Like many other organisations, the House of Commons uses settlement agreements to resolve employment disputes under certain circumstances.
“The House of Commons, which employs around 2,500 members of staff, follows the guidance on settlement agreements provided by Acas and the Cabinet Office.”