Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Criminals are not barred from becoming MPs - but that's set to change

41 replies

IwantToRetire · 04/12/2025 18:50

Parliamentary candidates could be barred from standing if they do not pass an enhanced DBS check which flags criminal records to employers, under a new plan put forward by MPs.

While many professionals working with the public such as teachers, NHS staff, and social workers are required to meet stringent safeguarding standards, MPs are not subject to the same checks, despite holding roles that routinely involve contact with vulnerable individuals. The expectation is that would-be candidates with convictions for violence or sexual offences would ring alarm bells in party headquarters before being selected. Lesser convictions could be overlooked at the party’s discretion.

“But we also need to be careful because decisions about who is appropriate to stand may be made by individuals who are not versed in the law nor understand the nuances of sentence types. This may lead to complete risk aversion to refusing to put forward any potential candidate with any form of criminal record.

“This could mean that the 12.4 million people who have criminal records but who have turned their lives around could be excluded from democracy. There is also a risk information gained from background checks could become public knowledge and potentially misused for political gain.”

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/criminals-not-barred-becoming-mps-set-change-4084469

Also can be read in full at https://archive.is/wmoGn

(Not that DBS checks are full proof.)

OP posts:
JanesLittleGirl · 04/12/2025 21:24

WildishBambino · 04/12/2025 20:26

There was a case a few years ago where a candidate had to withdraw as a potential Police & Crime Commissioner as he'd robbed someone as a young teen. Sounds terrible, but being caught and punished was a wake-up call for him; he turned his life around, worked with young offenders throughout his career and did a huge amount of community work. Would have been an ideal Commissioner - he was middle-aged when he found he was disqualified from standing.

That would be Simon Weston. The Welsh Guardsman who got his face burned off in the Falklands War and has been a massive advocate for veterans and the disabled ever since. But that crime that he committed at 16 obviously made him unsuitable for public office.

BettyBooper · 04/12/2025 20:56

EwwSprouts · 04/12/2025 20:35

Agree.
They would not be excluded from democracy. They can vote and join a party.

Show quote history

Yes, but then the power is deciding who is not able to work with children.

Which isn't a democratic system.

It's decided by government.

Which will then influence the next government....

BettyBooper · 04/12/2025 20:50

LikeAHandleInTheWind · 04/12/2025 19:41

If you're not fit to be allowed to work with vulnerable adults & children then it's perfectly reasonable to bar you from sitting in parliament. Why should our standards for MPs be lower than those for teachers and doctors?

Because the two are not the same.

And if you allow one to impact the other, it becomes politically significant overreach.

Have politically difficult thoughts? We'll catch you when you work with kids, and you're done.

The electorate are not children and treating them as if they are is ridiculous, honestly.

EwwSprouts · 04/12/2025 20:35

LikeAHandleInTheWind · 04/12/2025 19:41

If you're not fit to be allowed to work with vulnerable adults & children then it's perfectly reasonable to bar you from sitting in parliament. Why should our standards for MPs be lower than those for teachers and doctors?

Agree.
They would not be excluded from democracy. They can vote and join a party.

CalliopeFosterBeauchamp · 04/12/2025 20:35

I thought the law was changed in 1981 when the hunger striker Bobby Sands (in Northern Ireland’s Maze Prison) was elected as MP for for Fermanagh and County Tyrone. When Sands died, the Representation of the People Act was passed to stop other hunger strikers being elected to take his place.

But I’ve just read up on it and I see the Act only disqualifies people who’ve been in prison for over a year.

BettyBooper · 04/12/2025 20:31

bigliness · 04/12/2025 20:29

I'd be in favour of having to disclose this information, perhaps even putting it on the ballot paper. But fundamentally voters should be able to choose the person they want to represent them.

Barring people with criminal convictions seems like it would end up encouraging politically-motivated prosecutions in order to prevent people standing, which is ultimately bad for democracy.

Agree.

Convictions should be public knowledge for voters but not a veto on being able to vote for a candidate.

bigliness · 04/12/2025 20:29

I'd be in favour of having to disclose this information, perhaps even putting it on the ballot paper. But fundamentally voters should be able to choose the person they want to represent them.

Barring people with criminal convictions seems like it would end up encouraging politically-motivated prosecutions in order to prevent people standing, which is ultimately bad for democracy.

WildishBambino · 04/12/2025 20:26

There was a case a few years ago where a candidate had to withdraw as a potential Police & Crime Commissioner as he'd robbed someone as a young teen. Sounds terrible, but being caught and punished was a wake-up call for him; he turned his life around, worked with young offenders throughout his career and did a huge amount of community work. Would have been an ideal Commissioner - he was middle-aged when he found he was disqualified from standing.

BettyBooper · 04/12/2025 20:03

Is that because Tommy Robinson has been in prison perchance?

LordEmsworthsGirlfriend · 04/12/2025 20:03

I think there are very good reasons for not excluding people with criminal records from standing for public office per se. It's an incentive for the malicious prosecution of political opponents. One would hope most people wouldn't want to vote for those with a terrible record, though, and I can't imagine them not getting outed in the modern world.

JazzyJelly · 04/12/2025 19:51

One of the suggestions that make me say 'this wasn't a law already?'.

GeneralPeter · 04/12/2025 19:48

Interesting one. It would be more democratic to have mandatory disclosure of a candidate’s criminal record, then the voters can decide.

Original poster
IwantToRetire · 04/12/2025 19:45

moto748e · 04/12/2025 19:28

Sounds like one of those things that doesn't seem a bad idea on the face of it, but would be perhaps difficult to put into practice effectively and fairly.

You could say that about anything.

If political parties aren't competent to do what is a standard procedure for any number of people, but also balance that against understanding how the system works then they certainly shouldn't be putting themselves forward to run the country!

Agree also about financial convicions.

OP posts:
LikeAHandleInTheWind · 04/12/2025 19:41

If you're not fit to be allowed to work with vulnerable adults & children then it's perfectly reasonable to bar you from sitting in parliament. Why should our standards for MPs be lower than those for teachers and doctors?

moto748e · 04/12/2025 19:28

Sounds like one of those things that doesn't seem a bad idea on the face of it, but would be perhaps difficult to put into practice effectively and fairly.

lechiffre55 · 04/12/2025 19:21

Fraud convictions should also be a disqualifier.