I would be grateful if you could investigate a breach of the Advocacy Rule by the Rt Hon Stephen Dorrell MP.

According to Paragraph 58 of the MPs' Code of Conduct no Member may initiate parliamentary proceedings which relates to the interests of a body from which he receives a pecuniary interest.

Mr Dorrell is a remunerated Director of Faithful Ltd, a clothing industry firm. It does not recognise trade unions. On today's Order Paper, Mr Dorrell tabled a motion about trade union recognition. If his motion were passed, the company that pays him would benefit as the prospect of recognising trade unions would become extremely unlikely.

I believe Mr Dorrell was wrong to put his name to the motion as it appears prima facie to breach the advocacy rule. I raised a Point of Order[2] with the Speaker in Mr Dorrell's presence which would have allowed him a chance to make amends by either withdrawing his name from the Motion and making clear his interest but he declined to do so.

I would be grateful for your ruling on whether Mr Dorrell has broken the advocacy rule as laid down in the Code of Conduct for MPs.

6 April 1998

Thank you for your letter of 8 April and I apologise for being late in replying—I did not see your letter until after the Easter break.

My complaint against Mr Dorrell is quite specific. I understood from previous enquiries that the firm, Faithful Ltd, from which he receives remuneration does not recognise a trade union for its employees. Hence my surprise when he a) tabled the motion in question opposing trade union recognition thus initiating proceedings which is my view break the advocacy rule and b) did not declare or mention his interest in his speech.

As you can see from the Hansard I waited some time before raising my point of order. This was to double check that I was right in my supposition that the firm which pays Mr Dorrell did not indeed recognise trade unions. My colleague, John Hutton MP, went out in the course of the debate and telephoned the company himself and was told indeed that the firm does not recognise a union. Upon hearing his confirmation I raised the point of order you can read in Hansard and given Mr Dorrell's continuing failure to apologise either then or later in the debate I decided to ask you to institute an inquiry as set out in my letter of 6 April 1998.

23 April 1998