Fiona Onasanya: Recall petition successful & Labour hold seat after By-Election

[thenorthern]

According to her solicitor the only reason she has carried on as an MP is because its her only income. Her solicitor has mentioned that it is highly likely that she will lose her seat as an MP as a result of the sentencing. As others have pointed out as the sentence was less than a year she isn't automatically removed from the house of commons, the 1 year rule was brought in because of Bobby Sands.

Any recall petition would only take place after her appeal has been completed which could take time. Given the offence committed I would imagine she will be released on electronic tag after serving a short time in jail.

It will be interesting if there is a recall petition and if its successful as the only one so far has been for Ian Paisley jr in North Antrim which failed to get 10% of the electorate to sign it however in North Antrim the situation was different as even if there was a by-election Ian Paisley jr had indicated that he would stand again and it was likely he would have been re-elected rendering the by-election pointless, something his constituents knew.

 

[AlterEgo]

Apparently she's not going to resign and so she will get paid until the appeal and recall processes are exhausted. I suppose she feels that as her reputation is in tatters and she has no hope of a future legal or political career she may as well grab the money for as long as she can.

Meanwhile, the people of Peterborough have no representation in Parliament.

I think you are probably right here. The personal ruin trumps any sentence the court can pass on her.

 

[bnm]

Just means that she be only serving porridge for 6 weeks and 6 weeks on licence with I think around a year on probation licence.

With a three month sentence (29th January - 28th April = 90 days) she'll be eligible for Home Detention Curfew (electronic tagging). Three months is the shortest sentence that allows for a period of HDC. She'll be out after 30 days, which is the minimum period to be served in custody before eligibility for release to HDC. She'll then have 15 days on HDC taking her up to the halfway point of the sentence. Imprisonment time plus HDC time adds up to the Automatic Release Date at the halfway point of a short sentence. HDC is classed as custody.

The remaining 45 days will be on 'licence', and then approximately ten and half months of Post Sentence Supervision (PSS), totalling 12 months. PSS can take many forms, but Ms Onasanya's relatively minor offence and short custodial sentence means supervision will likely be quite light.

Note: Edited to include detail of Post Sentence Supervision. I was previously going by the sentencing rules that applied prior to 1st February 2015. On that date the Offender Rehabilition Act came into force meaning everyone sentenced to imprisonment for a period of at least a day and up to 2 years faces a total of 12 months supervision after release. Made up of there 'licence' period and PSS.

 

[Puffing Devil]

With a three month sentence (29th January - 28th April = 90 days) she'll be eligible for Home Detention Curfew (electronic tagging). Three months is the shortest sentence that allows for a period of HDC. She'll be out after 30 days, which is the minimum period to be served in custody before eligibility for release to HDC. She'll then have 15 days on HDC taking her up to the halfway point of the sentence. Imprisonment time plus HDC time adds up to the Automatic Release Date at the halfway point of a short sentence. HDC is classed as custody.

The remaining 45 days will be on 'licence'. As the sentence is under 12 months this licence period is unsupervised. She won't have 12 months 'on probation'.

Which illustrates what a fraud our prisons sentences are.

We should be looking at adopting a minimum sentence of 6 months and focusing on Curfews, Unpaid Work and Supervision for those who would normally receive a short sentence. Except that we've dismantled our Probation Service under the watch of a certain Chris Grayling. At the time those who knew the system said it would be a disaster; he pressed ahead anyway. It has been a disaster. (Grauniad article here; BBC news here). Can anyone think of anything else that Grayling has pushed ahead with despite advice from experts that it would not work......?

 

[thenorthern]

Which illustrates what a fraud our prisons sentences are.

We should be looking at adopting a minimum sentence of 6 months and focusing on Curfews, Unpaid Work and Supervision for those who would normally receive a short sentence. Except that we've dismantled our Probation Service under the watch of a certain Chris Grayling. At the time those who knew the system said it would be a disaster; he pressed ahead anyway. It has been a disaster. (Grauniad article here; BBC news here). Can anyone think of anything else that Grayling has pushed ahead with despite advice from experts that it would not work......?

Sort of you have to remember that the United Kingdom has one of the highest rates of incarceration in Europe and sentences tend to be longer in the United Kingdom compared to most countries in Europe, The United States has the highest rate. Also there are other things like the United Kingdom is one of the few countries in Europe which has a mandatory life sentence for murder as one of the few countries that still has a whole life order tariff. Also when criminals are released the criminal conviction will be on file and will show up on an extended DBS check for the rest of their life (in some countries criminal records are wiped after a certain time).

 

[furnessvale]

Fraud because she was driving, but claimed someone else did it?

I may be mistaken, but wasn't there also an element of "fitting someone else up" to take the offence?

 

[pedr]

It is definitely worth reading the sentencing remarks. They illustrate a significant range of factors which the judge had to take into account in deciding the sentence. They're published here: https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/...entencing-remarks-of-mr-justice-stuart-smith/

As I see it the factual situation for Ms Onasayna was that she probably didn't recall that she was driving the car at the time, due to her significantly hectic and complex living and working arrangments at the time. She gave the form she received to her brother - she says she made the assumption that he had been driving her car at the time. It was her brother who listed the names of innocent third parties, as he had done on a previous occasion when he knew he'd been driving his car. This was designed to make the police think that proceeding would be pointless (I think because the alleged drivers were outside the jurisdicition or untraceable). In any event no innocent third party was pursued by the police. At some point after this, the police suspected that Mr Onasayna had lied when he completed the forms and during the investigation Ms Onasanya asserted and continued to assert the accuracy of her brother's account of events, which is what the judge considered was the point at which she committed the offence. This, he said, makes it a considerably less serious offence than the one Chris Huhne and Vicky Pryce committed - because in that case there was conspiracy between them from the beginning, to avoid Chris Huhne reaching 12 points and risking a driving ban.

Mr Onasayana was sentenced to 10 months imprisoment for three nearly identical false declarations (two where he knew he'd been driving his car, and the one where he probably thought he had been driving his sister's car, at least initially). This was a 15% reduction on the 12-month sentence the judge considered appropriate, as he pled guilty before the start of the trial.

 

[DarloRich]

It is definitely worth reading the sentencing remarks. They illustrate a significant range of factors which the judge had to take into account in deciding the sentence. They're published here: https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/...entencing-remarks-of-mr-justice-stuart-smith/

As I see it the factual situation for Ms Onasayna was that she probably didn't recall that she was driving the car at the time, due to her significantly hectic and complex living and working arrangments at the time. She gave the form she received to her brother - she says she made the assumption that he had been driving her car at the time. It was her brother who listed the names of innocent third parties, as he had done on a previous occasion when he knew he'd been driving his car. This was designed to make the police think that proceeding would be pointless (I think because the alleged drivers were outside the jurisdicition or untraceable). In any event no innocent third party was pursued by the police. At some point after this, the police suspected that Mr Onasayna had lied when he completed the forms and during the investigation Ms Onasanya asserted and continued to assert the accuracy of her brother's account of events, which is what the judge considered was the point at which she committed the offence. This, he said, makes it a considerably less serious offence than the one Chris Huhne and Vicky Pryce committed - because in that case there was conspiracy between them from the beginning, to avoid Chris Huhne reaching 12 points and risking a driving ban.

Mr Onasayana was sentenced to 10 months imprisoment for three nearly identical false declarations (two where he knew he'd been driving his car, and the one where he probably thought he had been driving his sister's car, at least initially). This was a 15% reduction on the 12-month sentence the judge considered appropriate, as he pled guilty before the start of the trial.

thanks - i saw these remarks linked on Twitter yesterday but lost the link.

 

[Aictos]

I may be mistaken, but wasn't there also an element of "fitting someone else up" to take the offence?

Yes they both tried to pin the offence on a former tenant of theirs who happened to be living in Russia at the time of the offence.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Meanwhile, the people of Peterborough have no representation in Parliament.

For 6 weeks. The summer recess is longer than that!

They'll also be getting more representation from her in jail than they did out of her predecessor, who was last seen insulting disabled children on Twitter.

 

[Dai Corner]

For 6 weeks. The summer recess is longer than that!

They'll also be getting more representation from her in jail than they did out of her predecessor, who was last seen insulting disabled children on Twitter.

But it's not the summer recess is it? It's probably the most important six weeks in a generation.

 

[pedr]

But it's not the summer recess is it? It's probably the most important six weeks in a generation.

A post upthread suggests she'll be in prison for 30 days. I don't know whether home detention curfew would allow her to attend late night votes in London but if not, that means there's 45 calendar days when she is not at liberty to attend the House of Commons. So it's fair to point out it is a short limitation on her ability to represent her constituents in Parliament.

However she did vote in the first Meaningful Vote division on 15th January (as did all other independent MPs who've been thrown out of their parties for discipline reasons during this Parliament; the only MPs who didn't vote were unable to: through permanent illness (Paul Flynn), because they were the speaker/a deputy speaker/a teller, or because they don't participate in the Commons (Sinn Fein)). She couldn't vote in yesterday's series of votes on Brexit-related motions (but around ten people who voted on the 15th didn't vote yesterday), and she will miss some other votes which could be very close depending on what the next stage of Brexit wrangling brings.

 

[Dai Corner]

A post upthread suggests she'll be in prison for 30 days. I don't know whether home detention curfew would allow her to attend late night votes in London but if not, that means there's 45 calendar days when she is not at liberty to attend the House of Commons. So it's fair to point out it is a short limitation on her ability to represent her constituents in Parliament.

However she did vote in the first Meaningful Vote division on 15th January (as did all other independent MPs who've been thrown out of their parties for discipline reasons during this Parliament; the only MPs who didn't vote were unable to: through permanent illness (Paul Flynn), because they were the speaker/a deputy speaker/a teller, or because they don't participate in the Commons (Sinn Fein)). She couldn't vote in yesterday's series of votes on Brexit-related motions (but around ten people who voted on the 15th didn't vote yesterday), and she will miss some other votes which could be very close depending on what the next stage of Brexit wrangling brings.

Indeed. Paul Flynn is my MP and has not been able to attend Parliament for about six months now. He's never going to go back or resign, he says, so we are without representation until the next election (or he dies - he's in his 80s). I hope no votes are held in which those two votes would make a difference to the result.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Flynn will be paired so shouldn't make a difference.

Interesting you mention the Speaker: the people of Buckingham haven't had any representation for ten years, and can't change it because tradition is that peopke don't stsnd against the Speaker in a General Election.

 

[pedr]

Flynn wasn’t paired on the 15th as far as I can work out. 634 MPs voted, 2 MPs who would have voted aye and 2 no were tellers, the speaker and his three deputies don’t vote, and 7 Sinn Fein MPs haven’t taken their seats, which totals 649. Only Paul Flynn is unaccounted for there.

 

[Dai Corner]

Flynn will be paired so shouldn't make a difference.

Interesting you mention the Speaker: the people of Buckingham haven't had any representation for ten years, and can't change it because tradition is that peopke don't stsnd against the Speaker in a General Election.

Many of the Brexit votes haven't been / won't be along party lines and Flynn was a rebel and a staunch Remainer so I'm not sure pairing would work in his case.

Interesting point about the Speaker. The Greens, UKIP and an Independent stood against him in 2017 but he won easily with 65% of the vote. His must be one of the safest seats!

 

[furnessvale]

Interesting point about the Speaker. The Greens, UKIP and an Independent stood against him in 2017 but he won easily with 65% of the vote. His must be one of the safest seats!

Our present speaker seems to be making himself unpopular in certain quarters. What would happen if he was returned unopposed by his constituency, but then rejected by a vote of MPs?

Would he have to, or be expected to, take the Chiltern Hundreds to facilitate a proper by election?

 

[JamesT]

Our present speaker seems to be making himself unpopular in certain quarters. What would happen if he was returned unopposed by his constituency, but then rejected by a vote of MPs?

Would he have to, or be expected to, take the Chiltern Hundreds to facilitate a proper by election?

Yes, I don’t believe there’s anything automatic about standing down as Speaker that stops you being an MP. If Bercow was ousted he could remain a constituency MP for the rest of his term. But convention is you resign your seat as well when stepping down as Speaker.

 

[Groningen]

She also had a phone in her hand. Why not just accept the penalty, not lie and maybe would have known. The news also reached the Netherlands in the newspapers yesterday.

 

[furnessvale]

She also had a phone in her hand. Why not just accept the penalty, not lie and maybe would have known. The news also reached the Netherlands in the newspapers yesterday.

You are asking for honesty and morality from a politician.

Big ask!

 

[bnm]

Ms Onasanya's sentence has been referred to the Attorney General after a complaint that it was unduly lenient.

I wonder if it was Chris Huhne who complained.

 

[PR1Berske]

From Hansard:

Speaker
Order. I have received a letter today from the operations manager of the central criminal court informing me that Fiona Onasanya, the hon. Member for Peterborough, has been sentenced to a period of imprisonment of three months. I have also received a letter from the registrar of criminal appeals informing me that Fiona Onasanya has submitted an appeal against her conviction, which is listed for hearing on 5 March. I shall cause the text of the letters to be published in the Votes and Proceedings and in the Official Report.



[The letters will appear at the end of today’s proceedings.]

The appeal will push back the Recall procedure yet further.

 

[Modron]

Indeed. Paul Flynn is my MP and has not been able to attend Parliament for about six months now. He's never going to go back or resign, he says, so we are without representation until the next election (or he dies - he's in his 80s). I hope no votes are held in which those two votes would make a difference to the result.

According to Wales Online, Ruth Jones has been selected as the next candidate for Labour after Paul Flynn said that he will not stand again.

 

[A Challenge]

Flynn will be paired so shouldn't make a difference.

They don't pair on important votes like this - or at least that is what have been led to believe and is backed up if he was the only sitting MP (excluding Sinn Féin) but those five (4 tellers and Bercow)

Interesting point about the Speaker. The Greens, UKIP and an Independent stood against him in 2017 but he won easily with 65% of the vote. His must be one of the safest seats!

Just to put a Politics explanation to this, by agreement, the speaker stands as 'the speaker standing reelection', and is unopposed by the three main parties (Conservative/Labour/Liberal Democrats). In 2010 (Bercow's first election as speaker) he stood against:

• Buckinghamshire Campaign for Democracy (John Stevens) [10,331]
• The United Kingdom Independence Party (Nigel Farage MEP) [8,410]
• The British National Party (Lynne Mozcar) [2,394]
• The Official Monster Raving Loony Party (Colin Dale) [856]
• The Christian Party (David Hews) [369]
• Cut the Deficit (Simon Strutt) [107]
• Four Independents (Patrick Phillips [2,394], Debbie Martin [1,270], Geoff Howard [435], Antony Watts [332]

This is quite a lot of people to stand in one seat [11], compare to other seats that year (with the main parties) - Witney [10], Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath [8], Sheffield Halam [9]

 

[Busaholic]

If Ms Onasanya makes it through to the next General Election still in post she can automatically claim a further pay-out when she ceases to be an MP; she doesn't even have to stand again (and get defeated), she can just 'retire'. She wouldn't get an automatic payment, she'd have to claim but, based on her shameless conduct so far, I think you can take it she'll claim. Isn't life wonderful for MPs?!

 

[Modron]

If Ms Onasanya makes it through to the next General Election still in post she can automatically claim a further pay-out when she ceases to be an MP; she doesn't even have to stand again (and get defeated), she can just 'retire'. She wouldn't get an automatic payment, she'd have to claim but, based on her shameless conduct so far, I think you can take it she'll claim. Isn't life wonderful for MPs?!

That is if there is no triggering of the 2015 Recall Act.

If 7000 people petition against her in her constituency, from February 26th, then the seat would become vacant.

 

[Busaholic]

That is if there is no triggering of the 2015 Recall Act.

If 7000 people petition against her in her constituency, from February 26th, then the seat would become vacant.

Which would be the best result.

 

[Aictos]

Looks like she's been released after just 4 weeks

Article here

Also looks like she's continuing to lie about events stating she was innocent about the events....

 

[IanD]

Looks like she's been released after just 4 weeks

Article here

Also looks like she's continuing to lie about events stating she was innocent about the events....

According to Anglia news yesterday, she's still appealing so she's hardly going to hold her hands up.

 

[edwin_m]

Meanwhile an MP who happens to be white, male and right-wing is to face trial for forging expenses receipts, attracting no comment on this forum as far as I can see.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-47320171

Chris Davies, MP for Brecon and Radnorshire, is accused of two offences of forgery and one of providing false or misleading information for allowance claims.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said he was due to appear before Westminster magistrates in March.