Stephen Doughty, the Shadow International Development Minister, confessed to getting hold of the tranquilliser diazepam without a prescription. Byron Long, a long-standing friend of Doughty who was also a constituent, received a caution for supplying Doughty. An extraordinary police report, obtained by Guido, claimed Stephen Doughty had made an apology in the House of Commons in the presence of barristers and the Speaker, none of whom expressed the view that he should be dealt with criminally. The officer concluded that, as a result, Doughty should not be interviewed by the police about the matter. As Guido reported back in October, none of that actually happened. Nor would it have any bearing on a charging decision for a criminal offence if it had happened.Byron Long was given a police caution for supplying the Diazepam, something Stephen Doughty admits he initiated, and despite being complicit in the criminal offence of procuring a prescription drug he has not even been questioned. This is extraordinary given the police received an allegation that over a 2 year period Doughty had obtained, in the same manner, 140 Diazepam pills. The police didn’t even ask Doughty to deny the allegation. Incredulous Welsh Labour Party sources pointed out at the time that Alun Michael is the serving South Wales Police and Crime Commissioner. The former First Secretary of Wales and Leader of the Welsh Labour Party is a close friend of Doughty’s father, and Stephen Doughty is himself a protege of Alun Michael, who assisted Doughty in getting his seat. Senior police officers would not be unaware of the Commissioner’s political relationship.

If that smells like police corruption as a result of undue political influence, that is exactly what Guido thinks has happened. There was also a ridiculous ruling by the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner that whilst Doughty had made a “severe error of judgement” in asking a vulnerable constituent to supply him diazepam – a prescription-only Class C drug – she nonetheless ruled that he did not break the Parliamentary Code of Conduct in doing so. The Parliamentary Standards Commissioner ignored that Doughty was in breach of the duty of the Code of Conduct:

“Members have a duty to uphold the law”

She instead merely reflected that it was “ill-advised behaviour”. That’s one way of putting it; Guido would say it was exploiting a vulnerable constituent to commit a crime and repeatedly procure drugs illegally.

This morning The Times reports that in response to a complaint lodged by the constituent Byron Long, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) has now ruled that the police’s argument about evidential difficulties “does not appear to be borne out by the available evidence”, and ordered the force to investigate the differences in how it treated Long and Doughty.

The IOPC says:

“The evidence that I have considered leads me to conclude that there appears to be an inconsistency in the manner in which you were dealt with by South Wales Police, following [Long’s admission of supplying the drug] and Mr Doughty’s apparent acknowledgement regarding obtaining a controlled drug, which did not result in further investigative lines of enquiry”.

South Wales Police have therefore been ordered to investigate “the apparent difference in the outcomes experienced by Mr Long and Mr Doughty” and its decision-making process in the case.

The IOPC also said this investigation should examine whether Doughty was “treated differently due to his status as an MP, and also due to a personal relationship with Alun Michael, Police and Crime Commissioner for South Wales”. Just as Guido said in October.

See also:

• Police Reviewing Decision Not to Charge Stephen Doughty Over Procuring Diazepam,
• Labour MP Let Off After Asking Vulnerable Constituent to Illegally Supply Drugs

This morning’s Western Mail reports that South Wales Police have confirmed they are reviewing evidence in a case where they decided not even to interview Stephen Doughty MP – who subsequently admitted complicity in a criminal offence by asking a constituent to supply him with Diazepam, a prescription-only drug.

The Cardiff South and Penarth Labour MP Stephen Doughty claimed in a press statement that he had only asked Byron Long for Diazepam tablets in advance of a flight he intended to take in order to help him with his mental health difficulties. He told the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner this was a one-time occurrence, and that in any event, he had not taken the tablet. Guido has reason to believe this is not the full truth.

Guido has obtained the extraordinary report which resulted in Byron Long, a long-standing friend of Doughty who was also a constituent, receiving a caution. Written last June, the police report signed off by Michael Healey – and reviewed by other senior officers – claims Stephen Doughty had made an apology in the House of Commons in the presence of barristers and the Speaker, none of whom expressed the view that he should be dealt with criminally. The officer concluded that, as a result, Doughty should not be interviewed by the police about the matter. None of this actually happened, nor would there have been any bearing on a charging decision for a criminal offence.

Byron Long was given a police caution for supplying the Diazepam, something Stephen Doughty admits he initiated, and despite being complicit in the criminal offence of procuring a prescription drug, he has not even questioned. This is extraordinary given the police received an allegation that over a 2 year period Doughty had obtained, in the same manner, 140 Diazepam pills. The police didn’t even ask Doughty to deny the allegation. Incredulous Welsh Labour Party sources point out that Alun Michael is the serving South Wales Police and Crime Commissioner. The former First Secretary of Wales and Leader of the Welsh Labour Party is a close friend of Doughty’s father, and Stephen Doughty is himself a protege of Alun Michael, who assisted Doughty in getting his seat. Senior police officers would not be unaware of the Commissioner’s political relationship.

Yesterday Guido asked Starmer’s office if he still had full confidence in his frontbencher – they declined to respond. Doughty himself is being evasive, citing mental health issues.

The Parliamentary Standards Commissioner has ruled that Labour MP Stephen Doughty showed a “severe error of judgement” in asking a vulnerable constituent to supply him diazepam – a prescription-only Class C drug – yet nonetheless ruled that he did not break the Parliamentary Code of Conduct in doing so. Apparently he was “complicit in a criminal offence”, though too “naive” to even realise it. Stephen Doughty is a lawmaker.

In a response issued on Wednesday, Commissioner Kathryn Stone said that while Doughty had invited the constituent to “meet his pet cat” and subsequently asked him for “any spare diazepam” for an upcoming flight (which he received the next day), he “did not demonstrate an appreciation that […] he was asking him to commit a criminal offence.” Ironically, Doughty ended up cancelling the flight and claims he never even took the diazepam anyway.

Stone concluded her ruling that Doughty had “learned a very difficult lesson“:

However damaging these events have been for Mr Doughty personally, I am not persuaded that his actions have caused significant damage to the reputation and integrity of the House as a whole, or of its Members generally. Mr Doughty has learned a very difficult lesson, but his naivety and ill advised behaviour does not reflect more widely on other Members. I do not therefore uphold the allegation that he acted in breach of paragraph 17 of the Code of Conduct.

The Parliamentary Standards Commissioner seems to have overlooked that Doughty did however blatantly breach paragraph 5 of the duty of the Code of Conduct:

“Members have a duty to uphold the law”

The claim that his “ill-advised behaviour does not reflect more widely on other Members” is arguable. If the public thinks MPs are legislating whilst hallucinating on diazepam it might explain a few things, it will however hardly enhance the reputation of MPs. Whilst Guido thinks it should be legal to buy happy pills like diazepam over the counter, it isn’t legal now. If being complicit in a criminal offence isn’t a breach of the MPs’ Code of Conduct it means lawmakers can be law breakers as far as the Standards Commissioner is concerned. Ten years after the expenses scandal we are seeing the neutralising of the checks on MPs’ misbehaviour. IPSA and the Standards Commissioner are slowly yet surely undergoing regulatory recapture by MPs. It will end badly…

Cardiff West MP Kevin Brennan has been a keen member of the DCMS committee, especially with regard to lobbying for more government intervention with regard to music streaming. Brennan was praised by the Musicians’ Union for “excellent interventions” and being “extremely strong on the MU’s three main asks”. What the Committee wasn’t told is that the union praising him for delivering their lines had paid him £4,000 in 2019…

The only payments Brennan declared at the start of the Committee hearing were “occasional payments for working as a musician, which are declared in the Register of Members’ Interests”. Brennan, who has declared he is a member of the Musicians’ Union, has failed to declare his substantial and recent donation in any hearings so far, despite pushing the union’s line as part of a co-ordinated campaign. The Musicians’ Union even acknowledged having briefed Brennan for the debate.

While Brennan has declared the donation in his register of interests, MPs are required to also declare relevant interests at hearings where it’s on a related topic. Brennan, who has been an MP for twenty years, will have known the rules. Not least because fellow Labour MP Stephen Doughty, who was also praised by the Union, followed the rules and declared his Musicians’ Union donations…