Examine Elphicke lobbying claims, Labour told
Phillips says investigations should always be made as colleagues question the motives of party’s new MP
LABOUR came under pressure last night from its own MPS to investigate Natalie Elphicke over claims she lobbied ministers to intervene in her ex-husband’s sex assault trial.
Jess Phillips, the former shadow minister on domestic violence, said there should be an independent investigation into the claims over Ms Elphicke, the MP for Dover who defected from the Tories to Labour last week.
It was alleged at the weekend that Ms Elphicke asked Sir Robert Buckland, the former justice secretary, to speak to the judge who was going to preside over her ex-husband Charlie Elphicke’s trial four years ago over sex assaults on two women. Ms Elphicke allegedly wanted the trial date moved to a less high-profile slot in the court listings and questioned whether the senior judge presiding over it would be excessively tough on her former husband.
Sir Robert told her it would be “completely inappropriate” for him to speak to the judge as it would breach a constitutional principle that there should be a separation of powers between Parliament and the judiciary. Ms Elphicke has claimed the allegations are “nonsense” and Labour has questioned why the concerns were not raised at the time of the trial four years ago.
Speaking on LBC, Ms Phillips said: “There should always be an independent investigation into all these sorts of claims that come forward. What I find absolutely galling about the whole thing…is people tend to only care when it’s the other side that do it – and you have to try and care regardless.
“And Robert Buckland coming out now with these claims, which I have absolutely no idea of the veracity of, does somewhat suggest he cared considerably less about the rule of law [and] victims of sexual violence when it wasn’t politically expedient for him.
“I think questions have to be answered now, I don’t know how one would prove if two people are saying two different things, it’s not my wheelhouse, it’s not my pay grade, there are questions to be answered, there are apologies to be made and there is work to do and I maintain that position.”
Zarah Sultana, the Labour politician, said she did not “buy” Ms Elphicke’s defection to her party from the Conservatives unless the Dover MP “had the biggest Damascene conversion ever. It’s concerning as well in terms of conversations I’ve had within the PLP [Parliamentary Labour Party], especially in the Women’s PLP on the comments that she’s made about her ex-husband and the trial,” she told the BBC.
Labour officials dismissed calls for an investigation. A party spokesman said: “Natalie Elphicke totally rejects that characterisation of the meeting. If Robert Buckland had any genuine concerns about the meeting, then he should have raised them at the time, rather than making claims to the newspapers now that Natalie has chosen to join the Labour Party.”
Lord Blunkett raised the same question and branded the row “a storm in a teacup”. However, asked about her defection to Labour, he echoed Lord Kinnock’s comments that Labour “have got to be choosy to a degree about who we allow to join our party because it’s a very broad church but churches have walls and there are limits”. Lord Cameron yesterday branded Ms Elphicke’s defection from the Tories as “naked opportunism” by Labour. “This is quite a Right-wing Conservative MP suddenly welcomed into the Labour fold having never supported any of their policies, people or approaches,” he said.
“The revealing thing is it was like a moment where you look at the Labour Party and think – if you don’t stand for anything, then you’ll fall for stuff like this.”
He said he was “not a fan of defectors”, adding: “I took over from one in Witney and I think it always leaves a legacy of upset and betrayal and everything else.”
Ms Elphicke crossed the floor of the Commons to join Labour at the start of Prime Minister’s Questions last week, accusing the Tories of becoming a “byword for incompetence and division”.
‘There are questions that need to be answered, there are apologies to be made and work to do’
‘I think defecting always leaves a legacy of upset and betrayal and everything else’