Staff complaints (2021)

Response

1. how many allegations of sexual misconduct were made in the calendar years 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 (as far into 2021 as possible) staff employed by the House of Commons. By sexual misconduct I mean sexual harassment, indecent exposure, gender-based stalking or online harassment, sexual assault, rape and anything else you would consider as sexual misconduct.

We have interpreted your request to be about allegations of sexual misconduct made against staff employed by the House of Commons Administration.

Some information is held by the House of Commons in relation to this part of your request.

In the first instance, it may help you to know that there have been several routes to complain about sexual misconduct in the House of Commons for the requested period, as detailed below.

• Grievances – formal complaints by staff about the behaviour of other House of Commons staff can be handled under a generic grievance procedure;
• The Valuing Others Policy – for staff to complain about the inappropriate behaviour of other House of Commons staff. The Policy was permanently suspended in 2018;
• The Respect Policy – this was for staff of the House of Commons complaining about the behaviour of Members of their staff. The Policy was also permanently suspended in 2018;
• The Independent Complaints and Grievances Scheme (ICGS) – implemented in July 2018 and now serves as the procedure for complaints about any sexual misconduct, bullying or harassment;
• The Police – for any individual to make a complaint about criminal behaviour by another person;
• The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards (PCS) – investigates allegations that Members have breached their Code of Conduct; and
• Members’ HR Advice Service – provides confidential advice to Members of Parliament in their role as employers.

To respond to your request, we have broken down our response in line with these routes of complaint.

Complaints made under grievance procedures and the Respect and Valuing Others Policies:

The House of Commons holds information about complaints made under grievance procedures since 2014, and information about complaints made under the Respect and Valuing Others Policies from 2014 up until the point where they were suspended in 2018.

However, these cases are not categorised in the way you request. In order to supply a count of complaints which constitute ‘sexual misconduct’, a sophisticated judgement would have to be made about the information held. We are not obliged by the Freedom of Information 2000 Act (FOIA) to carry out this breakdown or create this information, and the information is therefore not held for the purposes of the Act.

Complaints made under the ICGS:

The House of Commons holds information about complaints of sexual misconduct made under the ICGS since it was established in July 2018.

When a person makes a complaint to the ICGS it is known as a ‘disclosure’ and is investigated under either the Sexual Misconduct Policy or the Bullying and Harassment Policy. We hold information about the number of disclosures investigated under each policy, including the year in which they were made.

The information you have requested is laid out below. It covers all disclosures investigated under the Sexual Misconduct Policy which were made against a member of staff of the House of Commons Administration.

Some information in the table has been redacted from the table above. This is because in some instances, owing to the low numbers of staff involved (fewer than 5), disclosing this data may make it possible for individuals to be identified. This information is therefore exempt by virtue of section 40(2) FOIA, as disclosure of this information to the public generally, in our view, would not be consistent with data protection principles in Article 5 of the UK General Data Protection Regulation. This is an absolute exemption and the public interest test does not apply.

Complaints made to the Police:

People who make complaints of a criminal nature are encouraged to report the matter to the police. This information is therefore not held by the House of Commons, but by the relevant police force.

Complaints made to the PCS:

The House of Commons holds information about allegations made about Members to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards (PCS). The PCS investigates allegations that MPs have breached the rules found in paragraphs 11-18 of the House of Commons’ Code of Conduct for Members, and has oversight of investigations that are conducted under the ICGS where the behaviour of an MP is being investigated.

The PCS publishes statistics about Code of Conduct complaints, including the number of complaints made to her, information about investigations carried out and the result of those investigations. Whilst the House of Commons holds this information, it is also already available from a public source. This information is therefore exempt from disclosure in accordance with section 21(1) and (2)(a) FOIA, which removes a public authority from the obligation to provide access to information which is already in the public domain. This is an absolute exemption and the public interest test does not apply.

However, it may help you to know that the information published by the PCS can be found at the Standards and Financial interests pages of our website.
In addition, the Independent Expert Panel (IEP), which was established in June 2020 to hear appeals against the Commissioner’s decisions, consider referrals and determine sanctions, also publishes information about complaints and investigations. Before the establishment of the IEP, these responsibilities were part of the remit of the House of Commons Committee on Standards.

The Commissioner’s role is created through Standing Order 150 of the House of Commons and information held by her is therefore subject to parliamentary privilege. The Standing Order also dictates what information is published. Therefore, any other information which may or may not be held by the PCS in relation to your request is exempt information under section 34(2) FOIA. The privileges of Parliament include the exclusive cognisance of each House over whether and when information relating to proceedings in Parliament should be published. In order to avoid an infringement of these privileges, the duty to confirm or deny whether the House of Commons holds such information does not apply to your request. This is an absolute exemption and the public interest test does not apply.

Information about complaints held by the Members’ HR Advice Service:

The House holds records of some matters for which MPs have sought advice from the Members’ HR Advice Service. However, this information is not broken down such that complaints of ‘sexual misconduct’ can be identified. In order to supply a count of such complaints, a sophisticated judgement would have to be made about the information held. We are therefore not obliged by the FOIA to carry out this breakdown or create this information, and the information is therefore not held for the purposes of the Act.

For each allegation, please tell me:
2. a description of the alleged behaviour

This information is held by the House of Commons. Each disclosure made to the ICGS contains a description of the behaviour of the respondent.

However, the contents of disclosures made to the ICGS are confidential. Section 41(1) FOIA provides that information is exempt if it was obtained by a public authority from any other person and that disclosure to the public by the public authority holding it would constitute a breach of confidence actionable by that or any other person. We consider that unauthorised disclosure of witness statements would amount to an actionable breach of confidence and this information is therefore withheld.

Section 41 is an absolute exemption and therefore not subject to the public interest test. However, we appreciate that a court would be unlikely to uphold a breach of confidence if the public interest in disclosure outweighed the public interest in maintaining the confidence. Therefore, we have considered the public interest factors and accept that there is a legitimate and reasonable interest in the public scrutiny of information held by the House of Commons, and the effectiveness of the processes in place to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct. However, where a duty of confidence exists, there is a strong public interest in favour of maintaining that confidence, and this is the case on this occasion. We have also considered the impact of disclosure on the interests of the confider.

In this case we consider that the public interest in favour of maintaining the confidence outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

3. whether the person making the allegations was a member of the public or employed by the police*

This information is held by the House of Commons. As part of the disclosures made to the ICGS, we hold some information about their circumstances.

However, considering that any further breakdown of the numbers of disclosures above would constitute even lower numbers of individuals (fewer than 5), disclosing this data may make it possible for them to be identified. This information is therefore exempt by virtue of section 40(2) FOIA, as disclosure of this information to the public generally, in our view, would not be consistent with data protection principles in Article 5 of the UK General Data Protection Regulation. This is an absolute exemption and the public interest test does not apply.

4. whether the person making the allegations was male, female or non-binary*
and
5. whether the accused was male, female or non-binary*

This information is not held by the House of Commons. The ICGS does not record the gender identity of the complainant or the respondent.

6. the job title of the accused*

This information is held by the House of Commons. As part of the disclosures made to the ICGS, we hold some information about their role.

However, this is their personal data and it would allow them to be identified. This information is therefore exempt by virtue of section 40(2) FOIA, as disclosure of this information to the public generally, in our view, would not be consistent with data protection principles in Article 5 of the UK General Data Protection Regulation. This is an absolute exemption and the public interest test does not apply.

7. whether the accused was charged
and
8. whether the accused was convicted

This information is not held by the House of Commons. If the allegations are of a criminal nature, complainants are encouraged to report the matter to the police. Any information about charges brought against respondents or their convictions will therefore be held by the relevant police force.

9. the outcome of any professional misconduct investigation

This information is held by the House of Commons. We hold information about the outcome of investigations into the disclosures made to the ICGS.

However, considering that any further breakdown of the numbers of disclosures above would constitute even lower numbers of individuals (fewer than 5), disclosing this data may make it possible for them to be identified. This information is therefore exempt by virtue of section 40(2) FOIA, as disclosure of this information to the public generally, in our view, would not be consistent with data protection principles in Article 5 of the UK General Data Protection Regulation. This is an absolute exemption and the public interest test does not apply.