AN SNP MP has jibed in the House of Commons that Tory peer Michelle Mone is more able to scrutinise Foreign Secretary David Cameron than MPs.
Cameron, who is now Foreign Secretary after being made a Lord by Rishi Sunak, is held accountable by the House of Lords rather than the House of Commons.
This means MPs cannot question Cameron on matters related to the Foreign Office, with Foreign Office minister Andrew Mitchell deputising for him in the Commons.
In a session of topical questions, SNP MP David Linden challenged deputy PM Oliver Dowden over the arrangements.
"Does the deputy prime minister think it's acceptable that Baroness Michelle Mone has more ability to scrutinise the Foreign Secretary than the members of this house?" he asked.
David Linden(SNP MP): Does he(Dowden) think it's acceptable that Michelle Mone has more ability to scrutinise the Foreign Secretary(David Cameron) than members of this House? pic.twitter.com/b55CKinsV3
— Haggis_UK 🇬🇧 🇪🇺 (@Haggis_UK) November 23, 2023
Michelle Mone is a Conservative life peer in the House of Lords and was awarded her peerage by the then-prime minister David Cameron in 2015.
The Conservative peer and her children reportedly received £29 million originating from the profits of a PPE business which was awarded large government contracts after she recommended it to ministers.
In his new role, Cameron will answer questions from peers monthly in the House of Lords.
Responding to Linden's topical question, Dowden replied: "I would refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answers.
READ MORE: EXCLUSIVE - Amir El-Masry breaks silence after Gaza ceasefire call censored by BBC
"It's a very well-established principle, indeed it happened I believe when the Lord Mandelson sat in the last Labour cabinet.
"Ministers can serve from the other place. However, the Government recognises, and indeed my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary recognises, the desire of this House to scrutinise him and he is committed to further measures to ensure that happens."
Cameron has not been an MP since 2016.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel