Elected representatives and criminal convictions

maryeliza54 - I read that Tommy Robinson wants to stand in the EU elections. The local news reports indicate he's looking for a seat in the north west. I imagine that's because he hopes to stir up hatred and conflict between the Muslim community and everybody else. he's a loathsome, dangerous bigot with a string of criminal convictions. Unfortunately, his supporters claim he's "only telling the truth - only saying things others are afraid / not allowed to say". They also claim he's been wrongly convicted.

To answer your question, no I do not believe he's fit to be an MEP, or any other kind of public servant. The rising popularity of bigots like him is alarming.

And what about applying some rules to the MPs in the Lords?

What about Tommy Robinson and his convictions? Is he fit to be an MEP ( even if we set to one side his political views)?

I didn’t know the Labour MP lied on oath, she should resign

I agree Septimia one strike and you are out. They are in a position of trust.
Rehabilitation of course but not as an MP. I would have thought this would be inherent in the job description.

Anyone applying for work in the public sector, say teachers, police officers, social workers and so on, will be subject to CRB checks. In the case of a one of conviction , say a half day's shop lifting at 17 with no offences since and the individual is now 35 - I'd want to discuss the circumstances with them but wouldn't necessarily not appoint.

If an existing employee is convicted of any offence for which they pleased NG I'd be very concerned. Especially if that individual is an MP.
So far as the speeding MP and the expenses MP - they should be expected to resign. If they don't, there should be a vote of no confidence and they should lose their employment.

Both these two recent MP's deserve sacking. Disgusting to continue to lie when in public office and being paid as the female MP is doing. Shocking to make false claims for expenses. Both should resign but o course, they lack integrity don't they.

As long as a piece of string. It depends on when and what.

If someone has a criminal conviction in the past, say under 30, but reforms their life and stands for Parliament at least a decade later then I think they can bring much to Parliament in being able to talk about penal matters.

For an MP to be convicted of perjury while an MP, should be an absolute reason for them being made to resign immediately. Same again if they are convicted of fiddling expenses.

In between these two extremes, depends. As I said, as long as a piece of string.

The Labour MP was stupid to lie , a speeding fine and it would have bern over .

The Tory MP should stand down , he made false claims for money for photographs for his office

Hmmm yes - it’s difficult isn’t it? Rehabilitation, second chances? So does that mean a difference between what happened before you stood as a candidate and being convicted whilst elected? And in both cases would ‘seriousness’ come into it and how would that be defined? T

Generally speaking I think that if people cannot obey the laws of the land, they shouldn't play any part in making them.
However, circumstances do alter cases. It rather depends on what the conviction is for, how serious it is, how long ago it happened and how the person has behaved since. All of which makes it a complicated decision. The simplest answer is 'one strike and you're out'.