Parliament And The Law Alexander Horne Gavin Drewry Dawn Oliver Editors

Parliament And The Law Alexander Horne Gavin
Drewry Dawn Oliver Editors download
https://ebookbell.com/product/parliament-and-the-law-alexander-
horne-gavin-drewry-dawn-oliver-editors-50676214
Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.
Parliament And The Law 1st Edition Alexander Horne Gavin Drewry
https://ebookbell.com/product/parliament-and-the-law-1st-edition-
alexander-horne-gavin-drewry-46745498
Parliament And The Law Alexander Horne Louise Thompson Ben Yong
Editors
https://ebookbell.com/product/parliament-and-the-law-alexander-horne-
louise-thompson-ben-yong-editors-50667066
Law Reform In Early Modern England 15001740 Crown Parliament And The
Press Barbara J Shapiro
https://ebookbell.com/product/law-reform-in-early-modern-
england-15001740-crown-parliament-and-the-press-barbara-j-
shapiro-50236082
The Scottish Parliament Law And Practice Mark Lazarowicz Jean Mcfadden
https://ebookbell.com/product/the-scottish-parliament-law-and-
practice-mark-lazarowicz-jean-mcfadden-51973992

Law Making And The Scottish Parliament The Early Years 1st Edition
Elaine E Sutherland Kay E Goodall Gavin Fm Little Fraser P Davidson
https://ebookbell.com/product/law-making-and-the-scottish-parliament-
the-early-years-1st-edition-elaine-e-sutherland-kay-e-goodall-gavin-
fm-little-fraser-p-davidson-51706684
Britain In The European Union Law Policy And Parliament 1st Edition
Philip Giddings
https://ebookbell.com/product/britain-in-the-european-union-law-
policy-and-parliament-1st-edition-philip-giddings-5368290
Law Liberty And Parliament Selected Essays On The Writings Of Edward
Coke Allen D Boyer
https://ebookbell.com/product/law-liberty-and-parliament-selected-
essays-on-the-writings-of-edward-coke-allen-d-boyer-36898510
Precedent And Statute Lawmaking In The Courts Versus Lawmaking In
Parliament 1st Ed Orlin Yalnazov
https://ebookbell.com/product/precedent-and-statute-lawmaking-in-the-
courts-versus-lawmaking-in-parliament-1st-ed-orlin-yalnazov-7326960
Parliament And The British Empire Some Constitutional Controversies
Concerning Imperial Legislative Jurisdiction Robert Livingston
Schuyler
https://ebookbell.com/product/parliament-and-the-british-empire-some-
constitutional-controversies-concerning-imperial-legislative-
jurisdiction-robert-livingston-schuyler-51903218

Foreword
Parliament regularly takes knocks. The expenses scandal, and the consequent
imprisonment of several of its Members, has been the most severe in recent times.
It has compounded the denigration of politics and politicians which is the staple
diet of important parts of the media. Scandals typically beget law as a solvent. In
the past Parliament has usually been able to stave off legal responses with tightened
self-regulation in line with the principle that it has exclusive cognisance over its
own affairs. Not so this time. The House of Commons Committee on Standards
now has outsiders sitting with Members and under the Parliamentary Standards
Act 2009 there is the regulation by a statutory body of Members’ expenses, salaries
and pensions. Law born of scandals can be hasty law and an over-compensation
for the lack of preventive action in the past. That has been the perception of some
MPs of the operation of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority,
established under the 2009 Act.
Parliament weakened creates space for intrusion by other institutions of the
state. That has been the experience following the expenses scandal. Members
in the United Kingdom have never enjoyed the immunity from legal process of
legislators elsewhere. Nor should they. But in the course of the prosecution of
Members for expenses abuses the Supreme Court reduced the historic scope of
parliamentary privilege. That comes on top of the worrying opinion of some
senior judges that the courts have power to strike down an Act of Parliament if
it violates fundamental constitutional principles (defined, as would be the case,
by the judges). This is a profoundly anti-democratic doctrine, not least because
it does not incorporate the parliamentary override (perhaps with special proce-
dures) or a reversal by popular referendum, which are a feature of jurisdictions
with constitutional courts. Fortunately free speech in Parliament, guaranteed by
article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689, remains unscathed. It was never under serious
threat by the interim injunctions which the courts issue against publication by the
media because of arguable breaches of confidence or privacy.
More law means more legal advice. Internal legal advice to Parliament has
expanded since the days when it could rely on the law officers and Speaker’s
counsel. The position with lawyer-Members is more uncertain. The days are
long past when full-time legal practice was readily combined with membership
of the Commons. The Lords are not short of practicing lawyers, although there
is the intriguing issue of whether the supply of former judges will dry up since
an appointment to the Supreme Court does not carry with it a life peerage.
What Parliament lacks in persons it makes up for in committees. The House
of Lords Constitution Committee has played an important role in examining
constitutional norms. Other select committees, such as the Justice Committee

viForeword
in the Commons, have performed an essential role in rendering accountable the
activities of the state. No longer can judicial independence be invoked as the lazy
excuse for shielding the administration of the justice system from parliamentary
scrutiny.
In spite of these challenges, the wheel may have turned and Parliament may be
on the up. Parliamentary fire was trained on the media over the phone hacking
scandal. The Parliamentary Committee on Banking Standards has focused on a
colossal scandal in what, before the effective nationalisation of important banks,
was private sector activity. For those who value Parliament as the key institution
of the state, its recovery is not a moment too soon. But there is an important
point here. Our system does not have the institutional checks and balances of
other jurisdictions. A degree of tension is inevitable. For the system to operate
successfully much depends on conventions, on pragmatic compromises and on
mutual restraint and respect. Respect only comes with ethical behaviour and high
standards.
This book, published under the auspices of the Study of Parliament Group,
is very much to be welcomed. The editors are to be applauded for their initia-
tive. The essays in the collection cover some of the issues touched on above,
but more, such as devolution and freedom of information. The various authors
have a profound knowledge of Parliament’s operation. The essays are a mine of
information. For that reason the chapters will prove a springboard for further
analysis. But the book is more than that because it raises some profound issues
about Parliament’s future and its relationship with other institutions of the state.
Those in Parliament, whether as Members or officials, and those interested in
Parliament, such as academics, public officials (including, dare I say judges), and
many others besides, will all learn from it.
Sir Ross Cranston FBA

Preface
This book is the result of a project which was first suggested at the Study of
Parliament Group’s Annual Oxford Weekend Conference at Worcester College
in January 2011. For those who are unfamiliar with the work of the SPG, it was
originally founded in 1964 by the distinguished political scientist, Bernard Crick,
and the senior House of Commons Clerk, Michael Ryle, as a forum in which
parliamentary scholars and officers of the two Houses of Parliament could meet
to discuss (under the Chatham House rule of confidentiality) matters of mutual
interest to do with parliamentary practice and reform. The Group, which will
celebrate its 50th anniversary in 2014, is still going strong, with approximately
200 members (its website is www.studyofparliament.org.uk/). In addition to
political scientists and parliamentary officials, the SPG also includes a number of
prominent constitutional lawyers. Contributors to this volume include members
from each of these categories.
In 1998, the SPG commissioned the publication of a collection of essays, enti-
tled The Law and Parliament which formed part of Butterworth’s Law in Context
series. Edited by two of the current editors, Dawn Oliver and Gavin Drewry, that
important work considered many of the most interesting issues of the day, includ-
ing devolution, the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights
and wider issues around accountability and modernisation, some of which were
inspired by the policies of the (then) recently elected Labour Government.
Much has changed since 1998 and rather than producing a second edition, the
editors decided to commission an entirely new book with many new contributors—
mainly members of the SPG, but also others (for example legal practitioners, such
as Hugh Tomlinson QC). Some issues that were considered in the earlier volume,
such as the Parliamentary Ombudsman and ‘Hansard and the interpretation of
statutes’ have not been addressed here, since they have been overtaken by other
matters of contemporary concern.
At the outset, it is important to note that this is neither a textbook, nor a com-
prehensive guide to Parliament, nor a treatise on the law-making process. Readers
looking for such works would find Erskine May on Parliamentary Practice, Griffith
and Ryle on Parliament: Functions, Practice and Procedures, Michael Zander’s The
Law Making Process and Rogers’ and Walters’ How Parliament Works—all men-
tioned at appropriate points in the chapters that follow—useful starting points.
This book, like its predecessor, is a collection of essays, examining issues that
are at the heart of current concerns and debates about parliamentary and consti-
tutional reform. It is divided into three thematically distinct sections. Although
the chapters are self-standing essays, they have been cross-referenced where the
editors thought that this would be of assistance to readers.

viiiPreface
The first part: ‘Privilege and Conduct’ introduces the concepts of parliamen-
tary privilege and ‘exclusive cognisance’ and engages with a number of practical
questions, including: the operation of parliamentary privilege (chapter one) and
its interaction with the civil and criminal law (chapters two and three). These
chapters also touch on matters raised in the Government’s Green Paper on par-
liamentary privilege, published in April 2012, which was under consideration by
a Joint Committee of Parliament at the time of writing.
Many of the issues considered in this part of the book have been particularly
contentious following the Members’ expenses scandal that emerged in the months
that preceded the 2010 general election. This resulted (amongst other things) in
the establishment of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA),
which is addressed, along with the subject of Members’ conduct, in chapter four.
Other issues have formed part of a broader debate: for example the question of
‘super-injunctions’ in privacy cases. Their impact on Parliament (and those inter-
acting with Parliament) is considered in chapter two.
The second part of the book is entitled ‘Parliament: Internal Arrangements’. It
considers the legal and procedural advice available to Parliament and parliamen-
tarians (chapter five). It also examines the effect of the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 on Parliament (chapter six) and the powers and functions of parliamen-
tary select committees (chapter seven). It concludes (in chapter eight) by looking
at the impact of devolution on the UK Parliament.
The final part of the book, ‘Rights, the Constitution and the Legal System’
provides two case studies, examining the work of two of Parliament’s ‘watchdog
committees’: the Joint Committee on Human Rights (chapter nine) and the
House of Lords Constitution Committee (chapter eleven). Between these two
contributions is a chapter on the effect on Parliament of the Human Rights Act
1998. This reflects on the vexed and, at the time of writing, unresolved issue of
whether we should have a new Bill of Rights (and Parliament’s potential role in
delivering one).
Part III of the book also contains some more theoretical reflections, consid-
ering the significant questions that have arisen over the issue of parliamentary
sovereignty (chapter twelve). The final chapter (chapter thirteen) examines
Parliament’s relations with the courts and the administration of justice following
the introduction of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, which removed the Law
Lords to a new Supreme Court and dramatically changed the constitutional role
of the Lord Chancellor.
A truly collaborative multi-disciplinary work, this volume contains perspectives
on the workings of the UK Parliament from insiders (House of Commons Clerks
and researchers of the House of Commons Research Service in the Commons
Library, and past and present Legal Advisers to select committees) who are at the
heart of the system, critical academic perspectives, and insights from practitio-
ners. The editors have benefited from the kind and invaluable assistance of many
members of the SPG—both contributors and non-contributors—when editing

Prefaceix
the chapters. We offer our thanks to the anonymous colleagues who helped with
this task.
The editors’ good fortune in having been able to draw upon such a rich and
wide-ranging fund of wisdom and experience has made our task both interest-
ing and congenial—and will, we are confident, ensure that the book becomes an
invaluable and unique resource for constitutional lawyers, political scientists and
practitioners.
Finally, we would like to thank Richard Hart, Rachel Turner, Mel Hamill and
Robert Crossley at Hart Publishing for their assistance and support throughout
this project.
Alexander Horne
Gavin Drewry
Dawn Oliver
February 2013

Detailed Contents
Foreword—Sir Ross Cranston .....................................................................................v
Preface—Alexander Horne, Gavin Drewry and Dawn Oliver ................................vii
Contributors .............................................................................................................xxi
Table of Cases ........................................................................................................xxiii
Table of Legislation...............................................................................................xxvii
Part I: Privilege and Conduct ................................................................................1
1. Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and the Law ................................................3
Liam Laurence Smyth
I.  Introduction .................................................................................................3
A. The Claiming and Granting of Privileges of the House
of Commons ...........................................................................................5
II. The Privileges, and Contempt of Parliament ..............................................7
A. Freedom of Speech .................................................................................7
  B. Freedom from Arrest ..............................................................................8
C. Right of Access to the Monarch ...........................................................11
  D. Favourable Construction ......................................................................11
E. Punishment for Contempt of Parliament............................................12
III. Exclusive Cognisance: Powers in Relation to Membership
of the House ...............................................................................................13
A. The Power to Expel Members ..............................................................13
B. Resignations, the Chiltern Hundreds and Statutory
Disqualiﬁ cation .....................................................................................14
C. Recall of MPs? .......................................................................................17
D. Lay Members of the Commons’ Committee on Standards ................18
IV. Parliament and the Courts .........................................................................20
A. The Application of Statutes to Parliament ..........................................21
B. Privilege and Judicial Proceedings .......................................................21
V. Attempts to Reform Parliamentary Privilege ............................................24
A. The Background: Some History ...........................................................24
B. The Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege
1997 to 1999, and after .........................................................................26
  C. Members’ Expenses ...............................................................................28
D. The Green Paper on Parliamentary Privilege 2012 .............................30
E. A New Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege ..........................32
VI. Postscript ....................................................................................................32

xivDetailed Contents
2. Privilege and Freedom of Speech .................................................................35
Oonagh Gay and Hugh Tomlinson QC
I. The Elements of Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689 Protection ..............35
A. Freedom of Speech ...............................................................................37
B. What are ‘Proceedings in Parliament’? ................................................39
C. What Constitutes ‘Impeaching or Questioning’? ................................41
D. What is a Place out of Parliament? .......................................................43
E. What Does Article 9 Protect? ...............................................................44
F. Article 9 and the European Convention on Human Rights ...............45
G. Limitations on Article 9 ........................................................................46
H. Enforcement of Article 9 ......................................................................48
II. The Sub Judice Convention, Injunctions and Contempt of Court ..........50
A. Injunctions and Super-injunctions ......................................................52
B. The Neuberger Report ..........................................................................54
C. ‘Active Proceedings’ ...............................................................................55
D. The Joint Committee Report on Privacy and Injunctions
and the Green Paper .............................................................................56
E. Right of Reply .......................................................................................57
F. Citation of Select Committee Evidence ...............................................59
III. The Courts and Reference to Hansard ......................................................59
IV. Protections for Communications with Constituents ...............................62
V. Conclusion ..................................................................................................64
3. Parliamentary Privilege and Criminal Law .................................................67
Sally Lipscombe and Alexander Horne
I. Introduction ...............................................................................................67
II. Privilege Claims Based on Article 9 of the Bill of Rights
and Exclusive Cognisance ..........................................................................68
A. Criminal Acts Committed within the Precincts of Westminster ........70
B. Corporate Dispensations: The Graham-Campbell Doctrine
and its Erosion ......................................................................................72
C. Issues over Bribery and Corruption ....................................................73
III. Two Case Studies ........................................................................................74
A. The Case of Damian Green and Searches
of the Parliamentary Estate ..................................................................74
B. The Case of Members’ Expenses ..........................................................81
IV. Reﬂ ections ..................................................................................................86
4. The Law and the Conduct of Members of Parliament .................................89
Richard Kelly and Matthew Hamlyn
I. Introduction ...............................................................................................89
II. Electoral Matters ........................................................................................92
A. The Background: Determination of Election Disputes
by the House of Commons ..................................................................92
B. Transfer of Jurisdiction over Election Disputes to the Courts ...........92

Detailed Contentsxv
III. The Declaration and Register of Members’ Interests ............................95
IV. The Committee on Standards in Public Life and a Code of
Conduct for Members of Parliament .....................................................97
A. The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards .............................98
V. Party Funding and Donations and Loans to Members .......................101
A. Dual Reporting of Interests .............................................................102
VI. Members’ Expenses and IPSA ...............................................................103
A. Arrangements in the House of Commons in Relation to
Members’ Allowances ......................................................................104
B. The MPs’ Expenses Scandal 2009 ....................................................106
C. The Passage of the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009 ..................108
  D. Compliance ......................................................................................110
VII. Investigation of Members’ Expenses—Questions of
Jurisdiction ............................................................................................111
A. Convictions for Expenses Fraud: the Aftermath ............................113
VIII. The House of Lords ...............................................................................114
A. Appointment of the House of Lords Commissioner
for Standards ....................................................................................114
B. Disciplinary Powers of the House of Lords ....................................115
IX. Reﬂ ections..............................................................................................116
Part II: Parliament: Internal Arrangements .....................................................119
5. Legal Advice to Parliament .........................................................................121
Andrew Kennon
I. Introduction ..........................................................................................121
II. Internal Sources of Advice ....................................................................122
A. Speaker’s Counsel and the Legal Services Ofﬁ ce (Commons)
and Counsel to the Chairman of Committees (Lords) ..................123
B. Select Committee Legal Specialists  ................................................124
C. The Scrutiny Unit (Commons) .......................................................125
D. Commons Library Department for Information
Services .............................................................................................125
E. Members of Parliament ...................................................................125
III. External Sources of Advice ....................................................................126
A. The Role of the Law Ofﬁ cers ...........................................................126
  B. Parliamentary Counsel ....................................................................127
C. Ministers and Government Departments.......................................128
  D. The Judiciary ....................................................................................129
E. Non-judicial Evidence to Committees ............................................133
IV. Putting the Advice to Work ...................................................................133
A. The Member of Parliament and his Constituency Function:
A Hypothetical Case Study ..............................................................136
V. Conclusion .............................................................................................137

xviDetailed Contents
6. Freedom of Information and Parliament ..................................................139
Ben Worthy
I. Introduction: The Freedom of Information Act 2000 ...........................139
A. Application of the FOI Act to the Two Houses of Parliament ..........140
B. What Does FOI Cover and How Does it Work?  ...............................142
C. FOI Requests to Parliament ................................................................144
II. Parliamentary Privilege and FOI .............................................................146
III. The Impact of FOI on Parliament  ..........................................................147
  A. Transparency .......................................................................................147
  B. Accountability .....................................................................................149
  C. Trust .....................................................................................................150
IV. The MPs’ Expenses Scandal .....................................................................152
A. FOI Requests and Appeals ..................................................................153
B. Why Did the Scandal Happen? ..........................................................155
  C. The Aftermath .....................................................................................156
V. Other Changes resulting from FOI .........................................................157
A. Tax Status of Peers ..............................................................................157
  B. Lobbying Access ..................................................................................158
VI. Closing Comments ...................................................................................158
7. Select Committees: Powers and Functions ................................................161
Richard Kelly
I. Introduction .............................................................................................161
II. Role of Select Committees .......................................................................165
A. Scrutiny of Legislation by Select Committees ...................................168
  B. Post-legislative Scrutiny ......................................................................172
  C. Pre-appointment Hearings .................................................................174
D. Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards ..........................178
E. Evidence on Oath ................................................................................179
F. Lay Members of the Committee on Standards ..................................180
  G. Statutory Committees .........................................................................182
III. Select Committee Powers .........................................................................184
  A. Sub Judice ............................................................................................185
B. The Power to Send for Persons, Papers and Records ........................186
  C. Sanctions .............................................................................................190
IV. Reﬂ ections ................................................................................................195
8. The Impact of Devolution on the UK Parliament .....................................197
John McEldowney
I. Introduction .............................................................................................197
II. Devolution in Context .............................................................................198
  A. Scotland ...............................................................................................199
  B. Wales ....................................................................................................204
  C. Northern Ireland .................................................................................208
  D. England ...............................................................................................210

Detailed Contentsxvii
III. Issues for the UK Parliament ................................................................212
A. The West Lothian and English Questions .......................................212
B. Legislative Consent Motions ...........................................................215
  C. Parliamentary Procedures and Select and Grand Committees .......216
D. Elections and Referendums .............................................................218
IV. Summary and Conclusions ...................................................................219
Part III: Rights, the Constitution and the Legal System ..................................221
9. The Joint Committee on Human Rights ....................................................223
Murray Hunt
I. Parliament and the Rule of Law ...........................................................223
II. The JCHR and Legislative Scrutiny ......................................................227
A. Focus on Signiﬁ cant Human Rights Issues.....................................227
B. Information Provided to the Committee: Explanatory Notes .......229
C. Towards Human Rights Memoranda ..............................................230
  D. Pre-legislative Scrutiny ....................................................................233
  E. Post-legislative Scrutiny ...................................................................236
III. Responses to Courts’ Judgments Concerning Human Rights ............237
A. Scrutiny of Remedial Orders ...........................................................237
IV. Human Rights Treaty Monitoring ........................................................238
V. Thematic Inquiries ................................................................................240
  A. Standards ..........................................................................................240
B. Selection of Inquiry Subjects ...........................................................241
VI. Sources of Human Rights Standards ....................................................242
VII. Diversity of Views about Human Rights ..............................................243
VIII. Effectiveness of the JCHR .....................................................................244
A. Guidance and Legislative Standards................................................245
IX. Reﬂ ections..............................................................................................247
A. Mainstreaming Human Rights and the Rule of Law
in Parliament ....................................................................................247
B. Law’s Place in Parliament ................................................................248
10. From the Human Rights Act to a Bill of Rights? .........................................251
Alexander Horne and Lucinda Maer
I. The Story of the Human Rights Act 1998 ...............................................251
A. No Love Lost? Human Rights, Politicians and the Public..............255
B. The Human Rights Act and the Role of the Judges ........................258
II. The Interactions between the Strasbourg Court, Domestic
Courts and Politicians in the UK ..........................................................260
A. The Prisoner Voting Issue ................................................................260
B. Strasbourg and Sovereignty .............................................................261
III. Towards a ‘British’ Bill of Rights?..........................................................263
A. Rights and Responsibilities ..............................................................264
  B. ‘Britishness’ ......................................................................................265

xviiiDetailed Contents
C. Rights and Devolution ........................................................................265
D. Economic and Social Rights ...............................................................267
E. Ownership of a Bill of Rights .............................................................267
F. Will the Coalition Deliver a Bill of Rights? ........................................269
IV. Relations with the European Court of Human Rights ...........................276
V. Conclusion ................................................................................................278
11. The House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution .....................281
Andrew Le Sueur and Jack Simson Caird
I. Introduction .............................................................................................281
II. Origins, Personnel, Operation .................................................................283
  A. Origins .................................................................................................283
  B. Membership ........................................................................................284
  C. The Inﬂ uence of the Chairman ..........................................................287
D. Committee Staff and Advisers ............................................................287
  E. Other Committees ..............................................................................288
III. Legislative Scrutiny ...................................................................................289
  A. Scope ....................................................................................................289
B. Process of Bill Scrutiny .......................................................................290
  C. Standards .............................................................................................292
D. Case Study on the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2006 ......293
E. Case Study on the Health and Social Care Bill 2011 .........................297
IV. Policy Inquiries .........................................................................................300
A. The Inquiry Process ............................................................................301
B. Assessing the Impact of Inquiries ......................................................302
C. Case Study on Deployment of British Armed Forces Abroad ..........302
V. Dialogue with the Judiciary .....................................................................304
VI. Conclusions ..............................................................................................307
12. Parliament and the Courts: A Pragmatic (or Principled)
Defence of the Sovereignty of Parliament .................................................309
Dawn Oliver
I. The Doctrine of the Sovereignty of Parliament ......................................309
A. Sovereignty vs Privilege ......................................................................311
B. The Special Position of European law ...............................................313
C. A Democratic Principle? .....................................................................313
II. A Choice for the UK: Constitutional Supremacy or
Parliamentary Sovereignty and Pragmatism? .........................................315
A. Towards Judicial Striking Down of Statutory Provisions? ................316
B. Parliamentary Sovereignty—a Doctrine, not a Democratic
Constitutional Principle .....................................................................317
  C. A Hypothetical ....................................................................................318
III.  Conﬂ ict, Comity and Culture in Relations between the Courts,
Parliament and the Executive ..................................................................321
IV. Deterrents against Abuse of Parliamentary Sovereignty ........................323

Detailed Contentsxix
A. Political Cultural Capital ....................................................................323
B. International and European Standards ..............................................324
C. The Houses of Parliament: Select Committees .................................327
D. Some Reﬂ ections .................................................................................329
V. What More Is To Be Done about Parliamentary Sovereignty? ..............330
A. A Written Constitution? .....................................................................331
B. Stronger Parliamentary Committees .................................................332
C. A Greater Role for the Courts? ...........................................................333
D. Towards an Independent Scrutiny Commission?..............................334
VI. Summary and Conclusions ......................................................................335
13. Parliamentary Accountability for the Administration of Justice .............339
Gavin Drewry
I. The Constitutional Territory of Accountability ......................................339
II. A Negative Tradition of Accountability—the View from the Lord
Chancellor’s Window ...............................................................................342
A. Non-accountability in the 1980s ........................................................344
B. Enter Lord Mackay—the Green Paper Furore ..................................345
III. New Public Management and the Administration of Justice .................347
IV. The Constitutional Reform Act 2005—Redrawing the Boundaries ......350
A. Some Implications for Parliamentary Accountability.......................352
V. The Ministry of Justice and Parliament ..................................................355
A. The Role of Select Committees ..........................................................356
VI. Conclusion ................................................................................................359
Index .......................................................................................................................363

Contributors
Sir Ross Cranston is a judge of the High Court, Queens Bench Division. He is
also a Visiting Professor of Law at the London School of Economics and Political
Science. He was a member of the House of Commons in the United Kingdom
from 1997–2005. He was Solicitor General from 1998–2001. Previously he was
Centennial Professor and Cassel Professor of Commercial Law at the London
School of Economics. Before that he was Lubbock Professor of Banking Law,
Director of the Centre for Commercial Law Studies and Dean of Laws at Queen
Mary & Westfield College. He was called to the Bar by Gray’s Inn. He is a Fellow
of the British Academy.
Gavin Drewry is Emeritus Professor of Public Administration at Royal Holloway,
University of London and an honorary professor in the Faculty of Laws at
University College London. He is a former Chair of the Study of Parliament
Group.
Oonagh Gay is Head of the Parliament and Constitution Centre at the House of
Commons Library. She is the Deputy Chair of the Study of Parliament Group.
Matthew Hamlyn has worked in the House of Commons since 1987 in a wide
variety of procedural and administrative roles. From 2001 to 2004 he worked
on secondment in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office as head of the
Parliamentary Relations and Devolution Department. In 2009–10 he worked
on the project to transfer responsibility for MPs’ expenses from the House of
Commons to the newly-created Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
(IPSA). Since 2010 he has been Head of the Office of the Chief Executive and
secretary of the Management Board of the House of Commons.
Alexander Horne was called to the Bar in 1999 (Lincoln’s Inn). Having previously
been the Legal Adviser to the Constitutional Affairs Committee, he is now Senior
Researcher for Human Rights, Public Law and Terrorism at the Research Service
of the Commons Library. He is a consultant for the Centre for Defence Studies,
King’s College London and is the Official Secretary to the Study of Parliament
Group.
Murray Hunt has been Legal Adviser to the Joint Committee on Human Rights
since 2004. He was called to the Bar in 1992 and as a practising barrister he was a
founder member of Matrix, where he specialised in public law and human rights.
He is a Visiting Professor in Human Rights Law at the University of Oxford.
Richard Kelly is a Senior Researcher at the Parliament and Constitution Centre in
the House of Commons Library.

xxiiContributors
Andrew Kennon has been an official of the House of Commons since 1977 and
is now Clerk of Committees. He was called to the Bar in 1979 (Gray’s Inn). He is
the co-author (with Professor Robert Blackburn) of the second edition of Griffith
and Ryle on Parliament: Functions, Practice and Procedures (Thomson Sweet &
Maxwell, 2003) and has written on parliamentary procedure and reform in vari-
ous publications.
Liam Laurence Smyth is the Clerk of the Journals in the House of Commons and
Commons Clerk of the Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege.
Sally Lipscombe is the Senior Researcher on Criminal Law at the Research Service
of the Commons Library. Previously, she worked as a solicitor at the international
law firm, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer.
Lucinda Maer is Head of the Research and Library Central Team in the House
of Commons Library. Previously a Senior Researcher in the Parliament and
Constitution Centre in the House of Commons, she is also member of the
Executive Committee of the Study of Parliament Group.
John McEldowney is Professor of Law at the School of Law, University of
Warwick. His research interests include constitutional law, and legal history. He
has published widely in this field.
Dawn Oliver is Emeritus Professor of Constitutional Law, University College
London. She is President of the Study of Parliament Group.
Jack Simson Caird is a PhD student at Queen Mary University of London and is
the Academic Secretary to the Study of Parliament Group.
Andrew Le Sueur is Professor of Constitutional Justice at the University of
Essex. He has acted as a specialist adviser to House of Commons and House of
Lords Committees and was Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Constitution
Committee 2006–09.
Hugh Tomlinson QC is a member of Matrix Chambers and of the Inforrm
Committee. He is also a founding editor of the UKSC blog.
Ben Worthy is lecturer in Politics at Birkbeck College, University of London. He
was the Research Associate in Freedom of Information and Data Protection at
the Constitution Unit at University College London. He led a two-year research
project examining the impact of FOI on Westminster.

Table of Cases
United Kingdom
A-G v De Keyser’s Royal Hotel Ltd [1920] AC 508  ............................................................... 4
Anisminic v Foreign Compensation Commission
[1969] 2 AC 147  .............................................................................................. 310, 316, 330
Associated Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury
Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223  ........................................................................................ 315
Attorney General v Leveller Magazine Ltd [1978] 3 All
ER 731; [1979] AC 440; [1979] 2 WLR 247 (DC)  ........................................................... 51
AXA General Insurance and others v The Lord Advocate
[2011] UKSC 46; [2011] CSIH 31  .................................... 202, 266, 310, 314, 316–17, 330
Aylesbury Election case 1704-05  ............................................................................................ 3
Beach v Freeson [1972] 1 QB 14  .......................................................................................... 62
Bell (John) case (1827)  ......................................................................................................... 23
Bowles v Bank of England [1913] 1 Ch 57  ........................................................................ 314
Bradlaugh v Gossett (1884) 12 QBD 271  ....................................................................... 69, 80
Bribery Commissioners v Ranasinghe [1965] AC 172 (PC)  ....................................... 311–13
British Railways Board v Pickin [1973] QB 219  .................................................................. 20
Buchanan v Jennings [2005] 1 AC 115 ................................................................................. 40
Cadder (Peter) v HM Advocate [2010] UKSC 43 (SC)  ..................................................... 203
Chamber (Henry) (1866) CJ 239  ......................................................................................... 70
Cheney v Conn [1968] 1 All ER 779  .......................................................................... 309, 317
Church of Scientology of California v Johnson-Smith
[1972] 1 QB 522  ................................................................................................................ 43
Corporate Ofﬁ cer of the House of Commons v
Information Commissioner and others [2008]
EWHC 1084 (Admin); [2009] 3 All ER 403 (HC)  ........................................ 121, 142, 155
Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil
Service [1985] AC 374  ............................................................................................ 315, 318
Edinburgh and Dalkeith Railway v Wauchope
(1842) 8 Cl 7 F 710  .................................................................................................. 309, 311
Ellen Street Estates v Minister of Health [1934] 1 KB 590 ........................................ 309, 313
Floyd’s Case (1621)  ............................................................................................................... 70
Fraser (Nat Gordon) v HM Advocate [2011] UKSC 24  .................................................... 203
Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30  ................................................................... 253
Hamilton v Al Fayed [2000] UKHL 18  ............................................................................ 85–6
Harmon CFEM Facades (UK) Ltd v Corporate Ofﬁ cer
of the House of Commons [1999] 67 Con LR 1 (TCC)  ................................................. 73
HM Advocate v McLean [2009] HCJAC 97; 2010 SLT 73  ................................................. 203
M v Home Ofﬁ ce [1994] 1 AC 377 (HL)  ........................................................................... 319
McInnes v HM Advocate [2010] UKSC 7  .......................................................................... 204

xxivTable of Cases
Ofﬁ ce of Government Commerce v Information Commissioner
[2010] QB 98; [2008] EWHC (Admin) 737  .............................................................. 59–60
Padﬁ eld v Minister of Agriculture [1968] AC 997 (HL)  ................................................... 315
Parliamentary Privilege Act 1770, Re [1958] AC 331 (PC)  ................................................. 37
Pepper v Hart [1993] AC 593  .......................................................... 33, 43, 46, 48, 59, 61, 127
Pickin v British Railways Board [1974] AC 965  ........................................................ 309, 311
Prebble v Television New Zealand [1995] 1 AC 321 ........................................................ 42–3
R v Chaytor and others [2010] UKSC 52  .................................................. 19, 28–9, 36, 38–9,
61–2, 67–71, 73, 78, 82,
84, 86–7, 113, 121, 147, 312
R v Criminal Injuries Compensation Commission,
ex p Lain [1967] 2 QB 364 (DC)  .................................................................................... 318
R v DPP, ex p Kebilene [2000] 2 AC 326  ............................................................................ 252
R v Eliot, Holles and Valentine (1629) 3 State Tr 293–336  ........................................... 35, 68
R v Graham-Campbell, ex p Herbert [1935] 1 KB 594  ............................................. 21, 72–3
R v Home Secretary, ex p Brind [1991] 1 AC 696  ................................................................ 47
R v Horncastle [2009] UKSC 14 ......................................................................................... 262
R v Lord Chancellor, ex p Witham [1998] QB 575  ............................................................ 316
R v McCann (1990) 92 Cr App Rep 239  .............................................................................. 53
R v North and East Devon Health Authority, ex p
Coughlan [2001] QB 213  ............................................................................................... 297
R v Rule [1937] 2 KB 375 ...................................................................................................... 62
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department,
ex p Leach (No 2) [1994] QB 198  ................................................................................... 316
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department,
ex p Pierson [1998] AC 539  .................................................................................... 310, 316
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p
Simms [2000] 2 AC 115  .......................................................................................... 310, 316
R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex p Factortame
(No 2) [1991] 1 AC 603  .......................................................................................... 311, 313
R v Special Adjudicator, ex p Ullah [2004] UKHL 26  ....................................................... 262
R (Age UK) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills & Ors [2009]
EWHC 2336 (Admin); [2010] ICR 260  ..................................................................... 59–60
R (Animal Defenders’ International) v Culture, Media
and Sport Secretary [2008] UKHL 15 ............................................................................ 324
R (Bailey and Others) v Brent London Borough
Council & Others [2011] EWCA Civ 1586  .................................................................... 273
R (Bradley) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
[2007] EWHC 242 (Admin)  ............................................................................................. 59
R (F) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010]
UKSC 17  .......................................................................................................................... 238
R (Fawcett Society) v Chancellor of the Exchequer
[2010] EWHC 3522  ........................................................................................................ 273
R (Federation of Tour Operators) v HM Treasury
[2007] EWHC 2062 (Admin)  ........................................................................................... 59
R (Jackson) v Attorney General [2005] UKHL 56;
[2006] 1 AC 262  ...................................................................................... 121, 317, 319, 321

Table of Casesxxv
R (Pelling) v SSHD [2011] EWHC 3291 (Admin)  ............................................................ 296
R (Wheeler) v Ofﬁ ce of the Prime Minister and Secretary
of State for Foreign and Commonwealth
Affairs [2008] EWHC 1409  .............................................................................................. 60
R (Woolas) v The Parliamentary Election Court
and others [2010] EWHC 3169 (Admin)  ....................................................................... 95
Ridge v Baldwin [1964] AC 40 (HL)  .................................................................................. 315
Roberts v Parole Board [2005] UKHL 45  ............................................................................ 61
Rost v Edwards [1990] QB 460  ............................................................................................. 43
Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF
(No 3) [2009] UKHL 28  ................................................................................................. 262
Sheriff of Middlesex case (1840) 11 Ad & El 273  ........................................................ 48, 312
Somerville v Scottish Ministers [2000] UKHL 44  ............................................................. 204
Stockdale v Hansard (1839) 9 Ad & El 1; (1839)
112 ER 1112  ................................................................................. 21, 48, 54, 69–70, 72, 312
Thoburn v Sunderland City Council [2002] EWHC
195 (Admin); [2003] QB 151  ..................................................................... 4, 253, 310, 313
Watkins v Woolas [2010] EWHC 2702 (QB)  ...................................................................... 94
Weleminsky case  .................................................................................................................... 64
Welsh (James) (1860) CJ 258 ................................................................................................ 70
Whaley v Lord Watson of Invergowrie 2000 SC 340
(Ct of Session, Inner House)  .......................................................................................... 201
Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry
(Appellant) [2003] UKHL 40  ........................................................................................... 46
Australia
R v Murphy (1986) 5 NSWLR 18  ..................................................................................... 42–3
Canada
R v Bunting (1885) 7 OR 524 (Ontario SC)  ........................................................................ 38
European Court of Human Rights
A v United Kingdom (2003) 36 EHRR 51  ..................................................... 12, 45, 121, 252
A and Others v United Kingdom [2009] ECHR 301  ......................................................... 278
Animal Defenders International v UK, (Application no 48876/08)
Grand Chamber, 22 April 2013  ...................................................................................... 324
Chahal v UK (1997) 23 EHRR 413 ..................................................................................... 261
Demicoli v Malta (1992) 14 EHRR 47  ................................................................................. 45
Friend v United Kingdom (2010) 50 EHRR SE6  ............................................................... 232
Gillan and Quinton v United Kingdom [2009] ECHR 28  ................................................ 278
Goodwin v United Kingdom (2002) 35 EHRR 447  .......................................................... 234
Greens and MT v United Kingdom (2011) 53 EHRR 21  .................................................. 234
Hatton v United Kingdom (2003) 37 EHRR 611  .............................................................. 262

xxviTable of Cases
Hirst v United Kingdom (No 2) [2005] ECHR 681;
(2006) 42 EHRR 41 (GC)  ..................................................... 61, 129, 234, 260–1, 323, 325
S and Marper v United Kingdom [2008] ECHR 1581;
(2009) 48 EHRR 50 (GC)  ....................................................................................... 233, 278
Salduz v Turkey (2008) 49 EHRR 421 (GC)  ...................................................................... 203
Scoppola v Italy (No 3) [2012] ECHR 868  ........................................................................ 260
SH v Austria (20011) 52 EHRR 6  ....................................................................................... 232
Tyrer v United Kingdom (1979–80) 2 EHRR 1  ................................................................. 277
Ireland, Republic of
Dillon v Balfour (1887) 20 LR Ir 600  ................................................................................... 41
Egan v Macready [1921] 1 IR 265  ...................................................................................... 320
New Zealand
Leigh v Gow [2011] NZSC 106  ............................................................................................ 47
Moonen v Board of Film and Literature Review
[2000] NZLR 9 (NZCA)  ................................................................................................. 333
R v Hansen [2007] 3 NZLR 1 (NZSC)  ............................................................................... 333
United States of America
Brown v Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954)  ............................................................. 323

Table of Legislation
United Kingdom
Act of Union with Scotland 1707  ......................................................................................... 37
Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009, s 36  ........................................... 21
Bank of England Act 1998  .................................................................................................. 284
Bill of Rights 1689  ....................................................................................... 26, 37, 64, 68, 266
Art 9  ................................................................................... v, 4, 7, 26, 28, 35–48, 50, 55, 59,
61–2, 64–5, 68–70, 73–4,
80–3, 85, 108, 127, 180, 311
Bribery Act 2010  .................................................................................................................... 74
Business Rate Supplements Act 2010  ................................................................................. 211
Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act 1919  .............................................................. 182
Communications Act 2003  ................................................................................................. 324
Compensation Act 2006  ..................................................................................................... 307
s 1  ..................................................................................................................................... 307
Constitutional Reform Act 2005  ............................................ viii, 130–1, 188, 298, 304, 323,
341, 347, 350–2, 356–7, 359–60
s 1  ..................................................................................................................... 225, 323, 326
s 5  ..................................................................................................................................... 354
s 5(1)  ................................................................................................................ 130, 306, 354
s 5(2)–(5)  ......................................................................................................................... 354
s 137  ................................................................................................................................. 188
Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010  .................................................... 109, 182
s 5  ..................................................................................................................................... 325
s 26  ................................................................................................................................... 110
s 40  ................................................................................................................................... 109
ss 268–275  ....................................................................................................................... 158
Sch 3  ................................................................................................................................. 110
Sch 6  ................................................................................................................................. 109
Contempt of Court Act 1981  ................................................................................................ 51
Convention Rights Proceedings (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 2009  .............................. 204
Courts Act 1971  ........................................................................................................... 342, 344
Courts and Legal Services Act 1990  ................................................................................... 347
s 110  ................................................................................................................................. 345
Criminal Justice Act 2003
s 321  ................................................................................................................................... 22
Sch 33  ................................................................................................................................. 22
Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000  ..................................................................... 44
Criminal Law Act 1967, s 1  ................................................................................................... 14
Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 .............................................................................. 84
s 4A  .................................................................................................................................... 84
Criminal Procedure (Legal Assistance, Detention and Appeals)
(Scotland) Act 2010  ........................................................................................................ 203

xxviiiTable of Legislation
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995  ........................................................................... 203
Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) (Scotland) Act 2009  ......................................... 202
Data Protection Act 1998  ...................................................................................... 63, 118, 122
s 40  ................................................................................................................................... 140
Defamation Act 1996  .................................................................................................. 38–9, 82
s 12  ..................................................................................................................................... 39
s 13  ......................................................................................................................... 26, 31, 33
Defamation Act 2013  ...................................................................................................... 57, 64
Department of Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2010  ......................................................... 198
Deregulation and Contracting Out Act 1994  .................................................................... 169
Devolution Acts see Government of Wales Act 1998; Northern
Ireland Act 1998; Scotland Act 1998
Digital Economy Act 2010  .................................................................................................. 170
Disability Discrimination Act 1995, s 65  ............................................................................. 21
Electoral Administration Act 2006  ..................................................................................... 103
s 59  ................................................................................................................................... 103
Employment Rights Act 1996  ....................................................................................... 73, 122
Equality Act 2010
s 29  ..................................................................................................................................... 21
s 149  ........................................................................................................................... 21, 273
Sch 3, para 1  ...................................................................................................................... 21
European Communities Act 1972  ...................................................................................... 313
s 2  ............................................................................................................................. 248, 314
s 2(4)  ................................................................................................................................ 313
European Union Act 2011  .................................................................................................. 313
s 18  ................................................................................................................................... 313
Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, s 397 ................................................................... 73
Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011  ............................................................................... 122, 311
Food Safety Act 1990  ............................................................................................................. 73
Foreign Compensation Act 1950  ........................................................................................ 316
Forfeiture Act 1870 ............................................................................................................ 9, 14
s 2  ......................................................................................................................................... 9
Freedom of Information Act 2000  ..................................................... viii, 103–4, 118, 121–2,
139–45, 148, 154, 173, 284
Pt 1  ................................................................................................................................... 141
Pt 2  ............................................................................................................................... 140–1
Pts 4–5  ............................................................................................................................. 141
ss 19–20  ........................................................................................................................... 141
s 21  ........................................................................................................................... 140, 146
ss 22–33  ........................................................................................................................... 140
s 34  ................................................................................................................... 140–1, 146–7
s 34(1)  .............................................................................................................................. 154
s 34(3)  .............................................................................................................................. 154
s 35  ................................................................................................................................... 140
s 36  ............................................................................................................................... 140–1
ss 37–39  ........................................................................................................................... 140
s 40  ........................................................................................................................... 140, 145
ss 41–44  ........................................................................................................................... 140

Table of Legislationxxix
s 50  ................................................................................................................................... 154
Sch 1  ................................................................................................................................. 140
Sch 3  ................................................................................................................................. 140
Government of Ireland Act 1920  ........................................................................................ 208
Government of Wales Act 1998  ...................................................................... 205–7, 212, 284
s 22  ................................................................................................................................... 205
Government of Wales Act 2006  ...................................................................... 197, 199, 205–7
Pt 4  ........................................................................................................................... 206, 290
ss 37–39  ........................................................................................................................... 192
s 93  ................................................................................................................................... 198
s 103  ................................................................................................................................. 218
Sch 5  ................................................................................................................................. 205
Greater London Authority Act 1999  .................................................................................. 211
Greater London Authority Act 2007  .................................................................................. 211
Greater London Authority (Referendum) Act 1998  .......................................................... 211
Health Act 2006  ................................................................................................................... 122
Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 ................................................................................... 122
Health and Social Care Act 2012, s 1(3)  ............................................................................. 299
House of Commons (Administration) Act 1978, s 1(2)(d)  ................................................ 83
House of Commons (Disqualiﬁ cation) Act 1975  ................................................................ 16
s 4  ....................................................................................................................................... 16
s 6  ....................................................................................................................................... 16
s 8  ....................................................................................................................................... 16
Sch 1  ................................................................................................................................... 16
House of Lords Act 1999  ...................................................................................... 91, 284, 292
s 2(2)  .................................................................................................................................. 91
s 2(4)  .................................................................................................................................. 91
Human Rights Act 1998  ................................................ viii, 45–7, 135, 168, 203, 230–1, 234,
237, 251–79, 284, 324, 343, 350, 360
s 2  ..................................................................................................................................... 263
s 2(1)  ................................................................................................................................ 263
s 3  ................................................................................................................. 248, 252–3, 309
s 4  ............................................................................................................. 129, 259, 314, 333
s 4(2)  ................................................................................................................................ 253
s 4(6)  ................................................................................................................................ 253
s 6(3)  ................................................................................................................................ 252
s 10  ........................................................................................................................... 129, 333
s 19  .............................................................................. 122, 129, 134, 229–30, 252, 324, 327
Hunting Act 2004  ................................................................................................................ 121
Intelligence Services Act 1994  ............................................................................................. 183
Juries Act 1974
s 9(1)  .................................................................................................................................. 22
Sch 1, Pt III  ........................................................................................................................ 22
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012  ........................................ 361
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006, s 3(2)(f)  ..................................................... 296
Local Government Act 1972, s 236  ..................................................................................... 207
Localism Act 2011  ....................................................................................................... 170, 211
Magna Carta 1215  ............................................................................................................... 266

xxxTable of Legislation
Mental Capacity Act 2005  ................................................................................................... 174
Mental Health Act 1983  ........................................................................................................ 10
s 141  ................................................................................................................................... 10
Mental Health (Discrimination) Act 2013, s 1  .................................................................... 10
National Health Service Act 2006
s 1  ..................................................................................................................................... 297
s 3  ..................................................................................................................................... 297
Northern Ireland Act 1998  ............................................................. 208–9, 212, 218, 266, 284
Pt IV  ................................................................................................................................. 199
s 4(1)  ................................................................................................................................ 354
s 5(6)  ................................................................................................................................ 198
Sch 4A
Pt 1A  ............................................................................................................................ 209
s 3C  .......................................................................................................................... 209
Northern Ireland Act 2009  ................................................................................................. 209
s 4(3)  ................................................................................................................................ 209
Sch 1  ................................................................................................................................. 209
Ofﬁ cial Secrets Act  ................................................................................................................ 51
Ofﬁ cial Secrets Act 1989  ................................................................................................. 24, 73
Parliament Acts  ................................................................................................................... 329
Parliament Act 1911  .................................................................................................... 309, 311
Parliament Act 1949  .................................................................................................... 309, 311
Parliament (Joint Departments) Act 2007  ......................................................................... 122
Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967  ............................................................................. 344
Parliamentary Elections Act 1868  .............................................................................. 90, 92–3
Parliamentary Oaths Act 1866  .............................................................................................. 82
Parliamentary Papers Act 1840  ......................................................... 21–2, 33, 54, 57, 64, 144
s 1  ....................................................................................................................................... 54
Parliamentary Privilege Act 1770  ..................................................................................... 3, 37
s 1  ....................................................................................................................................... 37
Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987  ........................................................................................ 65
Parliamentary Standards Act 2009  .................................... v, 90, 109, 113, 117, 122, 180, 182
s 2(1)  .................................................................................................................................. 91
s 3A  .................................................................................................................................. 109
s 3A(1)–(2)  ...................................................................................................................... 109
s 10  ..................................................................................................................................... 90
Sch 2  ................................................................................................................................. 110
Parliamentary Witnesses Oaths Act 1871, s 1  .................................................................... 179
Perjury Act 1911  ............................................................................................................ 82, 180
s 1  ..................................................................................................................................... 180
Planning Act 2008  ............................................................................................................... 170
s 9(2)  ................................................................................................................................ 170
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984  ......................................................................... 76, 78
s 8  ................................................................................................................................. 75, 80
s 8(3)  .................................................................................................................................. 75
s 10  ..................................................................................................................................... 80
Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011  ............................................................ 211
Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000  ....................................... 93, 102, 182
Sch 7  ................................................................................................................................. 102

Table of Legislationxxxi
Public Bodies Act 2011  ............................................................................... 135, 167, 170, 211
Public Order Act 1986  ........................................................................................................... 73
Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006  .................................................................................. 73
Representation of the People Act 1981  .......................................................................... 14–15
s 1  ......................................................................................................................................... 8
s 2(1)–(2)  ............................................................................................................................. 9
Representation of the People Act 1983  ...................................................................... 90, 93–4
s 3  ..................................................................................................................................... 260
s 123  ............................................................................................................................. 92, 94
s 159  ................................................................................................................................... 94
s 160(4)  .............................................................................................................................. 94
Representation of the People Act 1985  .............................................................................. 260
Scotland Act 1998  ............................................... 37, 199–201, 203–5, 212, 215, 266, 284, 330
Pt 1  ................................................................................................................................... 199
ss 23–26  ........................................................................................................................... 192
s 28  ................................................................................................................................... 200
s 28(5)  .............................................................................................................................. 201
s 28(7)  .............................................................................................................................. 215
s 29  ................................................................................................................................... 198
s 29(2)(d)  ......................................................................................................................... 266
s 30  ........................................................................................................................... 204, 218
s 30(2)  .............................................................................................................................. 200
s 33  ................................................................................................................................... 207
s 98  ................................................................................................................................... 203
Schs 4–5  ........................................................................................................................... 200
Sch 6, Pt II  ....................................................................................................................... 203
Sch 7  ................................................................................................................................. 219
Scotland Act 2006  ................................................................................................................ 201
Scotland Act 2012  ............................................................................................ 200–1, 204, 207
s 14  ................................................................................................................................... 204
ss 34–37  ........................................................................................................................... 204
Sex Discrimination Act 1975, s 76A  ................................................................................... 273
Sexual Offences Act 2003, s 82  ............................................................................................ 238
Short Titles Act 1896  ............................................................................................................... 4
Supreme Court (Ofﬁ ces) Act 1997  ..................................................................................... 349
Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011  ............................................ 236
Theft Act 1968  ................................................................................................................. 81, 91
s 17(1)(b)  ........................................................................................................................... 28
Trade Descriptions Act .......................................................................................................... 72
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007  ................................................................... 349
UK Parliamentary Voting Systems and Constituencies Act 2011  ..................................... 218
Vehicles (Excise) Act (Northern Ireland) 1972  ...................................................................... 9
Wales Act 1978  .................................................................................................................... 205
Bills
Bill on the Recall of MPs (draft) ..................................................................................... 17–18
Bribery Bill 2008–09 (draft)  ....................................................................................... 8, 27, 74
cl 15  .................................................................................................................................... 74

xxxiiTable of Legislation
Children and Families Bill  .......................................................................................... 132, 234
Citizens Convention Bill 2006–07  ...................................................................................... 269
Citizens Convention (Ethics and Accountability) Bill 2007–08  ....................................... 269
Civil Contingencies Bill (draft)  .......................................................................................... 171
Communications Bill 2002  ................................................................................................. 324
Constitutional Reform Bill  ............................................................................. 304, 350–3, 361
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill 2010
s 41  ................................................................................................................................... 157
s 42  ................................................................................................................................... 157
Coroners and Justice Bill, Explanatory Notes  .................................................................... 231
Corruption Bill 2002–03 (draft) ................................................................................. 8, 27, 74
Cross-Channel Tunnel Bill  ................................................................................................. 134
Crossrail Bill  ........................................................................................................................ 134
Defamation Bill 2010–12 (draft)  .......................................................................................... 26
Defamation Bill 2011 (draft)  ...................................................................................... 133, 234
Defamation Bill 2012–13 (draft)  .................................................................................... 26, 39
Defamation Bill (draft)  ............................................................................................... 57, 63–5
Disability Discrimination Bill (draft)  ................................................................................ 171
Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims (Amendment) Bill  ............................................. 128
European Union (Amendment) Bill  .................................................................................. 291
Financial Services (Banking Reform) Bill (draft)  .............................................................. 179
Fixed-term Parliaments Bill 2011  ................................................................................... 290–1
Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill 2006–07  ...................................................... 103
Gender Recognition Bill 2002–03 (draft)  .......................................................................... 234
George Grenville Bill  ............................................................................................................. 92
Government of Wales Bill 2006  ...................................................................................... 290–1
Health and Social Care Bill 2011  ........................................................................ 290–1, 297–9
Explanatory Notes  ........................................................................................................... 297
cl 4 ................................................................................................................................ 299
cl 10 .............................................................................................................................. 299
cl 20 .............................................................................................................................. 299
High Speed 2 Bill  ................................................................................................................. 134
House of Lords Reform Bill 2011–12  ......................................................... 129, 218, 285, 325
cl 6  .................................................................................................................................... 129
Explanatory Notes  ........................................................................................................... 324
House of Lords Reform Bill 2011–12 (draft)  ..................................................................... 328
Human Rights Bill  ............................................................................................................... 258
Identity Cards Bill 2004, Explanatory Notes  ...................................................................... 229
Identity Documents Bill 2010 ............................................................................................. 327
Immigration and Asylum (Treatment of Claimants) Bill 2003  ................................ 322, 330
Justice and Security Bill 2012–13  ............................................................................... 184, 235
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill 2006  ......................................................... 290, 293–6
Pt 1  ................................................................................................................................... 293
Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill  ............................................................................ 207
s 6  ..................................................................................................................................... 207
s 9  ..................................................................................................................................... 207
Orphans Bill  ............................................................................................................................ 8

Table of Legislationxxxiii
Parliamentary Standards Bill 2008–09  ............................................. 27, 43, 91, 108, 117, 131
cl 5(10)  ............................................................................................................................... 27
cl 6  .................................................................................................................................... 108
cl 9  ...................................................................................................................................... 27
cl 10  ............................................................................................................................ 27, 108
Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Bill 1999  ..................................................... 101
Explanatory Notes  ........................................................................................................... 101
Explanatory Notes 28–29 ................................................................................................ 102
Sch 6  ............................................................................................................................... 1012
Prisoner Voting (Eligibility) Bill 2012 (draft)  .................................................... 234, 325, 330
Protection of Freedoms Bill  ................................................................................................ 233
Explanatory Notes  ........................................................................................................... 232
Public Bodies Bill  ................................................................................................................ 296
Public Services (Social Value) Bill  ...................................................................................... 128
Reform Bill 1866  ................................................................................................................... 93
Scotland Bill ......................................................................................................................... 217
Statutory Instruments
Data Protection (Processing of Sensitive Personal Data) (Elected
Representatives) Order 2002 (SI 2002/2905) ................................................................... 63
Electoral Administration Act 2006 (Commencement No 8 and
Transitional Provision) Order 2009 (SI 2009/1509)  ..................................................... 103
Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/2408) .......................................... 60
Family Procedure Rules  ........................................................................................................ 63
Freedom of Information (Parliament and National Assembly for Wales)
Order 2008 (SI 2008/1967), Art 2(3)–(4)  ...................................................................... 142
House of Commons Disqualiﬁ cation Order 2010 (SI 2010/762) ....................................... 16
International Organisations (Immunities and Privileges) (Scotland)
Amendment Order 2010 (SSI 2010)  .......................................................................... 198–9
National Assembly for Wales (Transfer of Functions) Order 1999
(SI 1999/672)  ................................................................................................................... 205
Public Order (Northern Ireland) Order 1987 (No. 463 (N.I. 7))  ................................... 9–10
Australia
Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987  ............................................................................ 13, 38, 50
s 16(3)  ................................................................................................................................ 42
Canada
Charter of Rights  ................................................................................................................. 259
Ceylon, now Sri Lanka
Constitution  ........................................................................................................................ 312

xxxivTable of Legislation
European Union
Treaty of Lisbon  .................................................................................................................. 290
Working Time Directive  ..................................................................................................... 122
Germany
Basic Law, Art 47  ................................................................................................................... 62
New Zealand
Constitution  ........................................................................................................................ 322
Constitution Act 1986  ......................................................................................................... 332
Scotland
Claim of Right Act 1689  ................................................................................................... 4, 37
United States of America
Constitution, Art I, s 6, cl 1  ................................................................................................... 38
International
Charter of the United Nations  ............................................................................................ 226
Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination  ............................................... 239
European Convention on Human Rights  ................................... vii, 7, 12, 45–6, 49, 61, 121,
129, 134–5, 168, 200, 202,
204, 209, 226–7, 229–32,
251–6, 258–9, 263, 266,
270–1, 276–8, 307, 309,
318–19, 324–5
Art 5  ................................................................................................................................. 192
Art 6  ................................................................................................... 70, 192, 203, 288, 330
Art 8  ................................................................................................................... 229–30, 255
Art 10  ............................................................................................................................... 324
Art 14  ............................................................................................................................... 230
Art 46  ............................................................................................................................... 261
Protocol 1
Art 1  ............................................................................................................................. 202
Art 3  ..................................................................................................................... 260, 325
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights  .......................... 239, 324
UN Convention Against Torture  ........................................................................................ 239
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child  ....................................................... 232, 239, 241
UN Convention on the Rights of Disabled People  ............................................................ 240
Art 19  ............................................................................................................................... 241

1
Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance
and the Law
LIAM LAURENCE SMYTH
*
I. INTRODUCTION
T
HIS CHAPTER DEALS with the privileges of the House of Commons and
related issues.
1
Parliamentary privilege, as authoritatively set out in Erskine
May’s Parliamentary Practice,
is the sum of certain rights enjoyed by each House collectively as constituent parts of the
High Court of Parliament; and by Members of each House individually, without which
they could not discharge their functions, and which exceed those possessed by other
bodies or individuals. Some privileges rest solely on the law and custom of Parliament,
while others have been defined by statute.
2

In the course of ill-tempered exchanges over the Aylesbury election case in
1704/05, the two Houses of Parliament agreed ‘that neither House of Parliament
have power, by any vote or declaration, to create for themselves new privileges, not
warranted by the known laws and customs of Parliament’.
3
Some of the broader
claims for parliamentary privilege were reined in by the Parliamentary Privilege
Act 1770, which restricted the freedom from arrest to Members of the House
of Commons, removing the privilege from their employees (‘menial or other
servants’). The 1770 Act also allowed courts to hear cases brought against
Members of Parliament without being ‘impeached, stayed, or delayed by or under
colour or pretence of any privilege of Parliament’. So while Parliament may pass
*
Liam Laurence Smyth is Clerk of the Journals in the House of Commons.
1
The right of peers to be tried before a jury of other peers was abolished by statute in 1948. For the
history of this privilege, see R Furneaux, Tried by Their Peers (London, Cassell, 1959). Other privilege
issues relating speciﬁ cally to the House of Lords are addressed in Joint Committee on Parliamentary
Privilege, Report (1998–99, HL 43-I, HC 214-I) paras 329 and 336 and in HM Government,
Parliamentary Privilege (Green Paper, Cm 8318, 2012) paras 328–42.
2
Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice, 24th edn (London, Butterworths, 2011) 203.
3
CJ vol 14 (1702–04) 555, 559, 569, 570 and 572. The Conferences between the Houses were held
in February 1704 (1705 New Style).

4Liam Laurence Smyth
legislation to abridge its traditional privileges, it may not create new privileges,
except by legislation.
There are no examples of a traditional parliamentary privilege having been
revived once it had been overtaken by statute, even after the repeal of the statutory
provision. In the comparable domain of royal prerogative, it is settled law that
while a statute is in force, the thing it empowers the Crown to do can thenceforth
only be done under the statute.
4
It is not altogether clear what happens when a
prerogative power has been superseded by statute and the statutory provision
is later repealed but it is likely to be the case that the prerogative will not revive
unless the repealing enactment makes specific provision to that effect.
5
In the case
of jury service (discussed in this chapter below), a long-standing parliamentary
privilege of exemption was first incorporated in statute and then later repealed.
The questions of whether and how to codify the parliamentary privileges which
have survived into the twenty-first century are currently under examination in
Parliament.
Article 9 of the Bill of Rights is a landmark in the legal expression of parliamen-
tary privilege. It declares ‘That the Freedom of Speech and Debates or Proceedings
in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any Court or Place out
of Parliament’. The Bill of Rights itself has a special constitutional character, as it
enacted the terms of the joint Declaration by both Houses of Parliament which
had formed the basis for settling the Crown on William and Mary in 1688.
6
The
Bill of Rights belongs to the class of ‘constitutional’ statutes which cannot be
repealed or amended except by new legislation expressed in clear and unambigu-
ous terms.
7
Article 9 of the Bill of Rights was echoed in similar language in the
Claim of Right Act of the old Scottish Parliament.
8
Article 9 of the Bill of Rights
was not a new departure, but rather a recapitulation of the traditional parliamen-
tary privilege of freedom of speech: In 1563, the Speaker’s claim for freedom of
speech in debate was already justified as ‘according to the old antient order’.
9
4
Lord Atkinson in A-G v De Keyser’s Royal Hotel Ltd [1920] AC 508, 540, cited in D Greenberg (ed),
Craies on Legislation, 8th edn (London, Sweet and Maxwell, 2004).
5
This statement was made in a government submission to the House of Commons Select
Committee on Public Administration in 2003, quoted in Greenberg (ed), Craies on Legislation (n 4).
6
Both Houses adopted the wording of Art 9 in their Declaration of 12 February 1688/89, which
was presented to, and accepted by, Prince William and Princess Mary at the Banqueting House on
13 February 1688/89 before the reading of their Proclamation as King and Queen. The Act declaring
the rights and liberties of the subject, and settling the succession of the Crown, received the Royal
Assent on 16 December 1689, in the second Session of the ﬁ rst Parliament of King William and Queen
Mary. Under the Short Titles Act 1896, that Act’s short title is The Bill of Rights.
7
The notion of constitutional statutes as expounded by Laws LJ in Thoburn v Sunderland City
Council [2003] QB 151, is described in Craies on Legislation (n 4) at 14.4.6.
8
‘That for redress of all grievances and for the amending strengthening and preserving of the laws
Parliaments ought to be frequently called and allowed to sit and the freedom of speech and debate
secured to the members’.
9
D’Ewes 66, cited in Erskine May (n 2) 207.

Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and Law5
A. The Claiming and Granting of Privileges of the House of Commons
The claiming and granting of privileges of the House of Commons still form
part of the ritual surrounding the appointment of its Speaker at the outset of
each Parliament. The ceremonial drama begins on the day named by Royal
Proclamation for Parliament to meet after a general election. The House of
Commons assembles in its Chamber to await a summons by Black Rod to attend
Her Majesty’s Commissioners in the House of Peers. By long tradition, the
monarch never enters the lower House. The upper House provides the setting
in which the Commission is read for opening and holding the Parliament. The
Lords Commissioners acting as the monarch’s spokesmen direct the House of
Commons to proceed to the election of a Speaker, and to present the Speaker
Elect in the House of Lords, for the Royal Approbation. On their return to their
own Chamber, with the Father of the House presiding, the Commons get on with
choosing a Speaker.
10
If there is an incumbent returned at the general election as
‘the Speaker seeking re-election’, the House decides whether the Speaker should
be re-elected unopposed.
11
If that motion is defeated, or if there is no incumbent
Speaker, candidates for the chair are nominated. If there is more than one can-
didate, the House holds an election by secret ballot. The bottom candidate must,
and other candidates may, drop out between each of a series of ballots held until
one Member has received an absolute majority of valid votes cast in the final bal-
lot. With the traditional show of reluctance, the successful Member is ‘dragged’ to
the chair as Speaker Elect.
Once the House of Commons has decided on its Speaker Elect, the House is
again summoned to the House of Peers to hear the Commissioners declare Her
Majesty’s Approbation of the choice of the Commons. At the beginning of the
Parliament elected in 2010, John Bercow (Buckingham) was re-elected as Speaker,
having been the first Speaker elected by secret ballot in June 2009, following
10
The Father of the House, at present Sir Peter Tapsell (Conservative, Louth and Horncastle), is the
current Member of the House with the longest continuous service since signing the Roll as a Member
of the House.
11
At the time of writing the House of Commons had not considered a proposal by its Procedure
Committee that the House be invited to decide whether on the ﬁ rst day of a new Parliament, where
the Presiding Member’s decision on the question that a former Speaker take the chair was challenged,
that preliminary question should be decided by secret ballot or by open division. At present an open
division would be held only if, after collecting the voices for ‘Aye’ and ‘No’, the Father of the House’s
decision on the outcome (‘The Ayes have it’) was challenged (by further and persistent cries of ‘No’).
In an ordinary (open) division, Members have their names taken as they leave the Aye or No Lobby
respectively. See Procedure Committee, 2010 Elections for Positions in the House (Fifth Report) (HC
2010–12, 1573); Procedure Committee, 2010 Elections for Positions in the House: Government Response
to the Committee’s Fifth Report of Session 2010–12 (Ninth Report) (HC 2010–12, 1824) and the Leader
of the House’s letter of 6 March 2012 in response to the Committee’s Ninth Report of Session 2010–12,
published on the Committee’s website, www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/
commons-select/procedure-committee/Publications/previous-sessions/Session-2010-12/.

6Liam Laurence Smyth
the retirement of Speaker Michael Martin (Glasgow, North East).
12
The formal
exchanges in 2010 were as follows:
Speaker Elect: My Lords, I have to acquaint your Lordships that, in obedience to
the Royal Command, Her Majesty’s faithful Commons have, in the exercise of their
undoubted rights and privileges, proceeded to the election of a Speaker, and that their
choice has fallen upon myself. I therefore present myself to your Lordships’ Bar and
submit myself with all humility to Her Majesty’s gracious Approbation.
Lord Strathclyde (one of Her Majesty’s Commissioners): Mr John Bercow, we are com-
manded to assure you that Her Majesty is so fully sensible of your zeal in the public
service, and of your ample sufficiency to execute the arduous duties which her faithful
Commons have selected you to discharge, that Her Majesty does most readily approve
and confirm you as their Speaker.
Mr Speaker: My Lords, I submit myself with all humility and gratitude to Her Majesty’s
gracious Commands. It is now my duty, in the name of and on behalf of the Commons of
the United Kingdom, to lay claim, by humble petition to Her Majesty, to all their ancient
and undoubted rights and privileges, especially to freedom of speech in debate, to free-
dom from arrest, and to free access to Her Majesty whenever occasion shall arise, and that
the most favourable construction shall be put upon all their proceedings. With regard to
myself, I pray that, if in the discharge of my duties I shall inadvertently fall into any error,
it may be imputed to myself alone, and not to Her Majesty’s most faithful Commons.
Lord Strathclyde: Mr Speaker, we have it further in Command to inform you that Her
Majesty does most readily confirm all the rights and privileges which have ever been
granted to or conferred upon the Commons by Her Majesty or any of her Royal prede-
cessors. With respect to yourself, Sir, though Her Majesty is sensible that you stand in
no need of such assurance, Her Majesty will ever place the most favourable construction
upon your words and actions.
13
The royal ‘confirmation’ of ‘ancient and undoubted’ rights and privileges is a
notably paradoxical expression of the perennially provisional nature of the British
constitutional settlement. The Speaker then makes the customary report to the
House of Commons on resuming the chair in that House:
Mr Speaker: I have to report that this House has been in the House of Lords where Her
Majesty, by Her Royal Commissioners, has been pleased to approve the choice made of
myself for the Office of Speaker. I have, in your name and on your behalf, made claim by
humble petition to Her Majesty to all your ancient and undoubted rights and privileges,
particularly to freedom of speech in debate, freedom from arrest, and freedom of access
12
The election of a Speaker during a Parliament follows the same sequence, but begins with an
announcement in the Commons by the Prime Minister that the monarch gives leave to the House to
proceed forthwith to the election of a new Speaker (instead of a summons from Black Rod to receive,
in the setting of the House of Lords, the monarch’s direction to choose a Speaker) and ending with
the Speaker’s report to the Commons of his or her receipt of the royal approbation: see HC Deb 22
June 2009, col 617. The request and granting of privileges, however, are made only at the beginning
of a Parliament and not when a new Speaker is elected in the course of a Parliament—Erskine May
(n 2) 152–53.
13
HL Deb 19 May 2010, cols 3 and 4.

Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and Law7
to Her Majesty whenever occasion shall require, and that the most favourable construc-
tion shall be put upon all proceedings. All these Her Majesty, by Her Commissioners,
has been pleased to confirm in as ample a manner as they have ever been granted or
confirmed by Herself or by any of Her Royal Predecessors.
14

II. THE PRIVILEGES, AND CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT
A. Freedom of Speech
Of the four privileges claimed by the Speaker, the freedom of speech in debate is
the ‘most valuable and most essential’.
15
Since 2004 it has been the custom of the
House of Commons for the Speaker to make some general remarks on the opening
day of a Session, prior to the opening of the debate on the Queen’s Speech. This
practice has supplanted the former practice of several motions for sessional reso-
lutions on a variety of more or less technical issues being moved without notice on
the day of State Opening as potentially debateable items of business immediately
before the opening of the important debate on the Queen’s Speech.
16
In 2012, for
example, Mr Speaker Bercow’s address to the House included this passage:
Our ancient privileges allow us to conduct our debate without fear of outside interfer-
ence. Parliamentary privilege underpins proper democratic debate and scrutiny. It will
be under renewed scrutiny over the next few months, with the Government’s consulta-
tion on the subject. In particular, we enjoy freedom of speech in Committee proceedings
and in debate. Freedom of speech in debate is at the very heart of what we do here for
our constituents, and it allows us to conduct our business without fear of outside inter-
ference. But it is a freedom that we need to exercise responsibly in the public interest and
taking into account the interests of others outside this House.
17
The House of Commons committees which have considered this matter have
urged responsibility and moderation in the use of the privilege of freedom of
speech.
18
Freedom of speech is limited to a certain extent by self-regulation within
14
Votes and Proceedings, 19 May 2010 and HC Deb 19 May 2010, col 9.
15
Hatsell, Precedents of Proceedings in the House of Commons 4th edn (London, Luke Hansard and
Sons, 1818) vol 1, 85. Chapter 2 on privilege and freedom of speech analyses the several questions
posed by Art 9 of the Bill of Rights, including what are ‘proceedings in Parliament’, what constitutes
‘impeaching or questioning’ and what is a ‘place out of Parliament’. It goes on to discuss what Art 9
protects, Art 9 and the European Convention of Human Rights, the enforcement of Art 9, limitations
on Art 9, the sub judice rule, rights of reply, the citation of committee evidence and protection for
Members’ communications with constituents.
16
Procedure Committee, Sessional Orders and Resolutions (Third Report) (HC 2002–03, 855) and
the Government Response in the Third Special Report from the Procedure Committee (HC 2003–04,
613). The sessional resolutions covered motions relating to elections, witnesses, Commissioner of
Police of the Metropolis, Votes and Proceedings and the Journal of the House of Commons.
17
HC Deb 9 May 2012, col 1.
18
Eg, Committee of Privileges, Second Report (HC 222, 1978–79); Select Committee on Procedure,
Conduct of Members in the Chamber and the Alleged Abuse of Parliamentary Privilege (First Report)
(HC 1998–99, 290); Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege, Report (n 1) paras 224–25; Joint
Committee on Privacy and Injunctions, Report (2010–12, HL 273, HC 1443) para 221.

8Liam Laurence Smyth
Parliament. Rules limiting freedom of speech are imposed on their Members by
the two Houses themselves, either by convention or by specific rules, such as the
sub judice rule. There are also limitations placed by the Code of Conduct on the
extent to which Members may raise issues where they have a direct pecuniary
interest. For example, ‘No Member shall act as a paid advocate in any proceeding
of the House’ and
The acceptance by a Member of a bribe to influence his or her conduct as a Member,
including any fee, compensation or reward in connection with the promotion of, or
opposition to, any Bill, Motion, or other matter submitted, or intended to be sub-
mitted to the House, or to any Committee of the House, is contrary to the law of
Parliament.
19
The question of whether bribery should be a criminal offence has been considered
by successive Joint Committees, on Parliamentary Privilege in 1998–99,
20
the draft
Corruption Bill in 2002–03
21
and on the draft Bribery Bill in 2008–09.
22

B. Freedom from Arrest
Freedom from arrest does not apply in criminal cases.
23
It is customary for the
Speaker to be informed when a Member is arrested, particularly if his or her
detention precludes attendance in the Chamber on a sitting day. If a Member is
arrested but not detained for long enough to prevent attendance in the House,
Mr Speaker might not inform the House at all. When the Speaker does inform the
House, he may do so by making an oral statement or by simply arranging for the
notification he has received to be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings among
the papers formally laid that day before the House.
Similarly the Speaker is informed if a Member is imprisoned. A lengthy sentence
of imprisonment could entail the Member’s disqualification. The Representation
of the People Act 1981 (section 1) provides that:
A person found guilty of one or more offences (whether before or after the passing of
this Act and whether in the United Kingdom or elsewhere), and sentenced or ordered to
be imprisoned or detained indefinitely or for more than one year, shall be disqualified
19
Code of Conduct 2012 (HC 1885) paras 11 and 12 based on resolutions of the House of
6 November 1995 and of 2 May 1695, 22 June 1858, and 14 July 1947 (as amended on 6 November
1995) and 14 May 2002 respectively. Early editions of Erskine May included the following examples of
Members being punished for accepting bribes: John Ashburnham expelled in 1677 for accepting 500
pounds from French merchants for business done in the House; Speaker John Trevor expelled in 1694
for accepting a gratuity of 1000 guineas from the City of London after passing the Orphans Bill; and
Mr Hungerford expelled in 1695 for receiving 20 guineas for his pains and services as chairman of the
committee on the same Bill.
20
Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege, Report (n 1).
21
Joint Committee on the draft Corruption Bill, Report (2002–03, HL 157, HC 705).
22
Joint Committee on the draft Bribery Bill, Report (2008–09, HL 115-I, HC 430-I).
23
For more on Parliament and the criminal law see ch 3.

Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and Law9
for membership of the House of Commons while detained anywhere in the British
Islands or the Republic of Ireland in pursuance of the sentence or order or while unlaw-
fully at large at a time when he would otherwise be so detained.
Section 2 of the 1981 Act says:
(1) If a person disqualified by this Act for membership of the House of Commons is
elected to that House his election shall be void; and if such a person is nominated
for election as a member of that House his nomination shall be void.
(2) If a member of the House of Commons becomes disqualified by this Act for mem-
bership of that House his seat shall be vacated.
i. Treason
The Forfeiture Act 1870, part of which is still in force, provides that a conviction
for treason is a disqualification whatever the sentence:
if any person hereafter convicted of treason … such person shall become, and (until
he shall have suffered the punishment to which he had been sentenced, or such other
punishment as by competent authority may be substituted for the same, or shall receive a
free pardon from Her Majesty), shall continue thenceforth incapable of … being elected,
or sitting, or voting as a member of either House of Parliament.
24
ii. Imprisonment
Most recent cases of Members’ imprisonment for criminal offences have been
linked to civil disobedience, where imprisonment has been deliberately sought in
order to make a political point. On 20 April 1972 the Speaker informed the House
that Bernadette Devlin (Independent Unity, Mid Ulster) and Frank McManus
(Unity, Fermanagh and South Tyrone) had been imprisoned for offences of
organising and taking part in processions contrary to law in Northern Ireland,
for which they were later pardoned on 9 May 1972. Between January 1987 and
October 1988, Harold McCusker (Official Unionist, Upper Bann) was imprisoned
for failing to pay a fine imposed for driving a vehicle without a licence under the
Vehicles (Excise) Act (Northern Ireland) 1972; Ken Maginnis (Official Unionist,
Fermanagh and South Tyrone) and Peter Robinson (Democratic Unionist, Belfast
East) were imprisoned for the same offence; and Cecil Walker (Official Unionist,
Belfast North), William McCrea (Democratic Unionist, Mid Ulster), Ian Paisley
(Democratic Unionist, Antrim North), Roy Beggs (Official Unionist, Antrim
East), Clifford Forsythe (Official Unionist, Antrim South), Harold McCusker,
William Ross (Official Unionist, Londonderry East), Martin Smyth (Official
Unionist, Belfast South) and Peter Robinson were imprisoned for failing to pay
fines imposed for attending an illegal procession contrary to the Public Order
24
Forfeiture Act 1870, s 2.

10Liam Laurence Smyth
(Northern Ireland) Order 1987. Peter Robinson was imprisoned for similar
offences on several occasions.
25
In July 1991 Terry Fields (Labour, Liverpool
Broadgreen) was sentenced to 60 days’ imprisonment for refusing to pay a poll
tax bill of £373. Mr Fields remained a Member of the House but he was expelled
from the Labour Party. He did not keep his seat in the 1992 election, in which he
ran as an Independent (Labour-Socialist).
iii. Detention under the Mental Health Act
The special provisions applying to Members of Parliament under section 141
of the Mental Health Act 1983 were repealed on 28 April 2013 with the com-
mencement of section 1 of Mr Gavin Barwell’s Mental Health (Discrimination)
Act 2013. Under the 1983 Act, which consolidated earlier legislation, Members
of Parliament could lose their seats if they were detained under the Act for more
than six months. Mr Barwell’s Act also abolishes any common law which disquali-
fies a person from membership of the House of Commons on grounds of mental
illness. The Speaker’s Conference on Parliamentary Representation had perceived
a danger that section 141 might deter Members from admitting mental health
problems and seeking suitable treatment, and that, from a purely medical point
of view, the section might not operate in the best interests of Members.
26
The
Government agreed with the Speaker’s Conference that section 141 should be
repealed as soon as practicable.
iv. Search Warrants
In the wake of the furore over the arrest on 27 November 2008 of Damian Green
(Conservative, Ashford), an Opposition home affairs spokesperson, in his constitu-
ency and particularly over the associated search of his offices on the Parliamentary
Estate without a search warrant, the Speaker of the House unilaterally issued a
Protocol on 8 December 2008 requiring that in future a warrant would always be
required for a search of a Member’s office or access to a Member’s parliamentary
papers including electronic records and that the execution of any such warrant
would be referred to the Speaker for his or her personal decision. The Metropolitan
Police Service accepted that a search warrant ought not to be executed over prem-
ises in Parliament on a parliamentary sitting day without the express concurrence
25
The Ofﬁ cial and Democratic Unionist Members were among those who had resigned their seats
in protest at the Anglo-Irish Agreement and who had been successfully returned in the by-elections
held on 23 January 1986. In those by-elections, one Ofﬁ cial Unionist, Jim Nicholson, lost his Newry
and Armagh seat to Seamus Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party). Four Unionists success-
fully returned at the by-elections were not among those later arrested for criminal offences: James
Kilfedder (UPUP, Down North), James Molyneaux (Ofﬁ cial Unionist, Lagan Valley), Enoch Powell
(Ofﬁ cial Unionist, Down South) and John D Taylor (Ofﬁ cial Unionist, Strangford).
26
Report from the Speaker’s Conference on Parliamentary Representation (HC 2009–10, 239).

Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and Law11
of the Speaker (or a Deputy Speaker if the Speaker was not in Parliament). The
Metropolitan Police Service respectfully contested other parts of the Protocol, on
the grounds that it was not a proper function of the Speaker to decide matters
relating to the execution of a properly granted and valid search warrant which
would have been judicially determined upon the grant of the warrant.
27
C. Right of Access to the Monarch
The privilege of the House of Commons as a whole to have the right of access
to the monarch is exercised only on formal occasions, such as the presentation
in Westminster Hall on 20 March 2012 of the Address congratulating the Queen
on her Diamond Jubilee.
28
Other Addresses from the House are presented to the
Queen by Members of the House who have access to her as Privy Councillors
or as members of her Majesty’s Household. Among the Members of the House
of Commons who are also members of her Majesty’s Household is the Vice-
Chamberlain of the Household, a title held by the Government Deputy Chief
Whip, whose duties include reporting to the House the Queen’s formal replies to
Addresses such as the one the House of Commons passes early in each Session
thanking Her Majesty for the Gracious Speech addressed to both Houses at the
State Opening of Parliament.
29
D. Favourable Construction
It is more a matter of courtesy than of privilege that the most favourable con-
struction be placed upon the proceedings of the House. As Erskine May observes,
‘by the law and custom of Parliament the Queen cannot take notice of anything
said or done in the House but by the report of the House itself’.
30
The Speaker’s
request for this privilege harks back to an era when Parliament met in private,
and when there could even be a serious risk to the Speaker personally if offence
were taken by the monarch at possibly distorted accounts of what had transpired
in the Chamber. The notion of favourable construction has perhaps something in
common with the characterisation of the largest party opposing the Government
as Her Majesty’s loyal Opposition.
27
Select Committee on Issue of Privilege, Police Searches on the Parliamentary Estate (Report) (HC
2009–10, HC 62) paras 145–49. More detail on the Damian Green case and the Speaker’s Protocol is
given in ch 3.
28
Votes and Proceedings, 20 March 2012 and HC Deb 20 March 2012, cols 625–27.
29
Votes and Proceedings, 17 September 2012 and HC Deb 17 September 2012, col 619.
30
Erskine May (n 2) 236.

12Liam Laurence Smyth
E. Punishment for Contempt of Parliament
Erskine May sets out the history of the ‘conflict’ between Parliament and the courts
over limits of the claim of ‘the High Court of Parliament’.
31
Significant judicial
decisions, tempered by relatively few statutory provisions, have tended to push
back the boundaries of parliamentary privilege. The lack of enforceable sanctions
has reduced Parliament’s power to punish contempts effectively. Although con-
tempts are not confined to the examples cited in Erskine May, it has become the
practice of the House to pursue alleged contempts only rarely: recent examples
of references of alleged contempts to the Committee of Standards and Privileges
include the treatment of a witness, a firm of solicitors attempting to dissuade a
Member from making allegations by threatening action against third parties, the
hacking of Members’ mobile phones, and witnesses misleading a select commit-
tee.
32
The importance of respecting the principles enshrined in the European
Convention of Human Rights looms over Parliament, though its exemption from
being treated as a public authority under the Human Rights Act 1988 and the
‘wide margin of appreciation’ afforded by the European Court of Human Rights
still preserve the legislature from excessive judicial intervention.
33
i. Select Committee Effectiveness and Powers
Early in the 2012–13 Session, the House of Commons referred to its Committee
on Standards and Privileges the conclusions of the Culture, Media and Sport
Select Committee in its report on News International and the Hacking of Mobile
Phones, that certain witnesses had misled the select committee.
34
The debate on
22 May 2012 on referring the matter traversed some of the territory covered in
chapter seven of the Green Paper on Parliamentary Privilege, in connection with
the powers of select committees and the penal jurisdiction of the House.
35

Within a few weeks of the referral, the Standards and Privileges Committee
announced how it would conduct its inquiry.
36
The Committee noted that the
House of Commons had decided that:
its penal jurisdiction should be exercised (a) as sparingly as possible and (b) only
when the House is satisfied that to exercise it is essential in order to provide reasonable
31
Erskine May (n 2) ch 17.
32
Committee on Standards and Privileges, Privilege: Protection of a Witness (Fifth Report) (HC
2003–04, 447) (the Weleminsky case); Committee on Standards and Privileges, Privilege: John
Hemming and Withers LLP (Report) (HC 2009–10, 373). See references below for the cases relating to
the hacking of mobile phones. There have been several other reports by the Committee on Standards
and Privileges about leaks of committee proceedings, which could constitute contempts.
33
Erskine May (n 2) 301, deals with the case of A v the United Kingdom (Application 35373/97)
[2003] EHRR 917. See also the article by Malcolm Jack on the case in (2003) 73 The Table 31–36.
34
Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, News International and the Hacking of Mobile
Phones (Eleventh Report) (HC 2010–12, 903-I) para 275.
35
HC Deb 22 May 2012, cols 990–1014.
36
House of Commons Standards and Privileges Committee, Formal Minutes, 3 July 2012.

Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and Law13
protection for the House, its Members or its officers, from such improper obstruction or
attempt at or threat of obstruction as is causing, or is likely to cause, substantial interfer-
ence with the performance of their respective functions.
37

Bearing this in mind, the Committee had decided that it would not recommend
that the House should exercise any power of committal to prison in the matter
referred to it, and that if it found any of the allegations to be proved, the maximum
penalty it would recommend the House to impose would be admonishment. The
Committee set out the procedure for its inquiry, to include taking oral evidence
on oath, and affording any subjects of its inquiry whom the Committee intended
to criticise opportunity to receive and comment on warning letters before the
Committee made its report to the House. At the time of writing, the outcome of
the inquiry by the Committee on Standards and Privileges was not known.
38

In July 2012, the Liaison Committee, comprising the chairs of the principal select
committees in the House of Commons, published on its website a memorandum
by the Clerk of the House of Commons on the Powers of Select Committees.
39
In
its later report on Select Committee Effectiveness, Resources and Powers, the Liaison
Committee concluded ‘we are persuaded that the disadvantages of enshrining
parliamentary privilege in statute would outweigh the benefits’.
40
III. EXCLUSIVE COGNISANCE: POWERS IN RELATION
TO MEMBERSHIP OF THE HOUSE
A. The Power to Expel Members
One of the most significant powers which the House of Commons continues to
exercise over itself is its power to expel its own Members. When the Australian
Parliament came to clarify parliamentary privilege in its Parliamentary Privileges
Act 1987, it removed the right of either House to expel its own Members. The
House of Commons has seldom resorted to expulsion.
37
Erskine May (n 2) 218; Committee of Privileges, Recommendations of the Select Committee
on Parliamentary Privilege (Third Report) (HC 1976–77, 417); and the resolution of the House of
6 February 1978.
38
The arrest on 30 August 2012 of one of the witnesses whose conduct had been referred to the
Committee on Standards and Privileges led to a pause in its investigation. With the appointment of lay
members to the Committee on Standards on 13 December 2012, the former Committee on Standards
and Privileges was replaced by two separate committees, on Standards and of Privileges respectively,
the latter with no lay members on it. The inquiry into the conduct of the witnesses was inherited by
the Committee of Privileges.
39
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmliaisn/697/697we36.htm or http://
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmliaisn/697/697we01.htm.
40
House of Commons Liaison Committee, Select Committee Effectiveness, Resources and Powers
(Second Report) (HC 2012–13, 697) para 133 (published 5 November 2012). See further discussion of
reform of parliamentary privilege in section V of this chapter.

14Liam Laurence Smyth
Three Members of the House of Commons were expelled by resolution in the
last century. In August 1922, Horatio Bottomley (Independent, South Hackney)
was expelled following his conviction for fraud which resulted in a sentence of
seven years’ imprisonment. In October 1947, Garry Allighan (Labour, Gravesend)
was expelled for gross contempt of the House after lying to a committee following
the publication of an article accusing MPs of insobriety and of taking bribes for
the supply of information. In December 1954, Peter Baker (Conservative, South
Norfolk) was expelled after receiving a custodial sentence of seven years following
a conviction for forgery. The length of the sentences of imprisonment given to
Mr Bottomley and Mr Baker would now, under the Representation of the People
Act 1981, result in automatic disqualification from the House of Commons.
Horatio Bottomley’s offences were not felonies, so at the time he would not have
been automatically disqualified. In the case of Mr Baker, the motion for expul-
sion need not have been moved: under the provisions of the Forfeiture Act 1870
then still in force, he would have been automatically disqualified by reason of his
conviction for a felony.
41
While the House has the right to expel any of its Members, it cannot simply by
resolution prevent the return of a Member at any election, although the person
elected may be subject to a statutory disqualification from membership of the
House of Commons.
42

B. Resignations, the Chiltern Hundreds and Statutory Disqualification
The convenient fiction that certain sinecures, including the office of steward
or bailiff of Her Majesty’s three Chiltern Hundreds of Stoke, Desborough and
Burnham, or of the Manor of Northstead, were ‘offices of profit under the Crown’
grew up in order to facilitate de facto resignation from the House of Commons.
The roll-call of holders of these offices covers a wide variety of cases. One has only
to scan the list of those appointed to the Chiltern Hundreds to get an impression
of the diversity of frequently honourable motives which have led Members volun-
tarily to relinquish their seats: recent holders of the disqualifying sinecures include
Sir Peter Soulsby (Labour, Leicester South) who became the first directly-elected
41
All distinctions between felony and misdemeanour were abolished by s 1 of the Criminal Law
Act 1967. An apparently inadvertent consequence of treating almost all offences as misdemeanours
was the lack of an automatic disqualiﬁ cation from membership of the House of Commons following
a criminal conviction for a serious offence. This was not restored until the Representation of People
Act 1981, passed in the wake of the death of Bobby Sands (Anti-H Block, Fermanagh and South
Tyrone) on hunger strike in the Maze prison in Northern Ireland.
42
Tony Benn (Labour) was returned for Bristol South East at a by-election on 4 May 1961, after
he had been disqualiﬁ ed from membership of the House of Commons on inheriting his late father’s
peerage, but an Election Court found that he had not been duly returned because as a peer he was
ineligible and that Malcolm St Clair (Conservative), the candidate who came second at the poll, was
duly elected. The House accordingly voted, by 235 to 145, that the return from the by-election should
be amended and Mr St Clair took his seat in the House.

Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and Law15
Mayor of Leicester, former Prime Minister Tony Blair (Labour, Sedgefield),
Boris Johnson (Conservative, Henley) who became the directly-elected Mayor
of London, and Terry Davis (Labour, Birmingham Hodge Hill), who had been
elected Secretary-General of the Council of Europe.
43

It may be that, in a few other cases, Members took the Chiltern Hundreds (or
the Manor of Northstead) in order to jump, rather than wait to be pushed, out
of the House. Denis MacShane (Labour, Rotherham) announced his intention
to apply for the Chiltern Hundreds within hours of the publication of a report
from the Committee on Standards and Privileges on 2 November 2012 recom-
mending that he be suspended from the service of the House for 12 months.
44

Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central) was appointed to the Chiltern Hundreds
on 8 February 2011, following his conviction for criminal offences relating to his
expenses but before sentence was passed.
45
John Stonehouse, the former Labour
Co-operative Member for Walsall North who latterly sat for the English National
Party, was appointed to the Chiltern Hundreds on 27 August 1976 prior to his
conviction on 21 charges of fraud, theft, forgery, conspiracy to defraud, causing a
false police investigation and wasting police time, for which he was sentenced to
a term of seven years’ imprisonment. In the most recent case of this kind, Chris
Huhne (Liberal Democrat, Eastleigh) was appointed on 5 February 2013 to the
Chiltern Hundreds after pleading guilty the previous day to perverting the course
of justice over a traffic offence. He was sentenced on 11 March 2013 to 8 months’
imprisonment.
43
There are some examples of seats being voluntarily relinquished so that Members can imme-
diately stand again in order to make a point. The March 1978 by-elections in Northern Ireland
forced by the resignation of 15 Unionist Members have already been mentioned above. David Davis
(Conservative, Howden and Haltemprice) resigned his seat on 18 June 2008 in protest at the erosion
of civil liberties in the United Kingdom in order to ﬁ ght a by-election on 10 July 2008, which he won
comfortably. Dick Taverne (Labour, Lincoln) resigned his seat on 16 October 1972 after falling out
with his local party over his pro-EEC position. He was returned at the rather delayed by-election on
1 March 1973 as an Independent Democratic Labour candidate. Although he retained the seat at the
February 1974 general election, he lost it to the Labour candidate Margaret Jackson (later Beckett) at
the October 1974 general election. Bruce Douglas-Mann (Mitcham and Morden) was unsuccessful
in his bid to be returned to the House on 3 June 1982 when he gave his constituents the opportunity
to return him to the House after he had defected from the Labour Party to join the nascent Social
Democratic Party. Angela Rumbold (Conservative) won the seat.
44
Committee on Standards and Privileges, Mr Denis MacShane (Second Report), (HC 2012–13,
635) para 62. An amendment was unsuccessfully moved in the Committee that its recommendation
should be for Mr MacShane’s expulsion from the House. The Committee made clear that its recom-
mendation sprang principally from Mr MacShane’s having knowingly submitted 19 false invoices over
a period of four years which were plainly intended to deceive the parliamentary expenses authorities.
On 6 November 2012 the House of Commons endorsed the Committee’s recommendation, noting
that Mr MacShane had already left the House.
45
The sentence Mr Illsley actually received, of 12 months’ imprisonment, would not have triggered
the automatic disqualiﬁ cation under the Representation of the People Act 1981. It cannot be known
whether, or to what extent, his prior resignation weighed in the balance as a mitigating factor in the
judge’s sentencing decision: Mr Illsley’s resignation was not mentioned in Saunders J’s sentencing
remarks on 10 February 2011 in Southwark Crown Court.

16Liam Laurence Smyth
Under section 4 of the House of Commons (Disqualification) Act 1975,
the offices of steward or bailiff of Her Majesty’s three Chiltern Hundreds of
Stoke, Desborough and Burnham, or of the Manor of Northstead, are treated
as included among the list of disqualifying offices in Schedule 1 to that Act.
The Schedule is updated from time to time by Order in Council.
46
A signifi-
cant acknowledgment of the House’s interest in determining its own mem-
bership is that the statute may be amended in this way only after the House
of Commons has itself approved a resolution on which the Order in Council
must be based. More importantly, the Act also provides for the House itself
to direct that a disqualification for membership of the House of Commons
on any of the grounds set out in the Act be disregarded if it appears to the
House that the grounds of disqualification which applied at the material time
have been removed, and that it is otherwise proper so to do so.
47
As a further
safeguard, no Member may be required to accept any appointment to which
the Act applies.
48

When Gerry Adams, the Sinn Féin Member for West Belfast, wished to resign
his seat in order to stand in the 2011 Irish general election, he wrote to the Speaker
on 20 January 2011 to announce his desire to resign. Mr Adams was appointed by
the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the office of steward or bailiff of the Manor of
Northstead on 26 January 2011. In a statement released to the media, Mr Adams
said he
had no truck whatsoever with these antiquated and quite bizarre aspects of the British
parliamentary system. I am proud to have represented the people of West Belfast for
almost three decades and to have done so without pledging allegiance to the English
queen or accepting British parliamentary claims to jurisdiction in my country.
Sir George Young (Conservative, North West Hampshire), the Leader of the
House, told the House of Commons that:
Gerry Adams wrote on 20 January making it absolutely clear that he wanted to relin-
quish his seat and stand in the Irish general election. As Gerry Adams should have
known, a Member of Parliament may not resign; there are no means by which a Member
may vacate his or her seat during the lifetime of a Parliament, other than by death,
disqualification or expulsion. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, therefore, in line with
long-standing precedent granted Mr Adams the office of profit under the Crown of
steward and bailiff of the Manor of Northstead, so we delivered Mr Gerry Adams to the
required destination, although he may have used a vehicle and a route that was not of
his choosing.
49
46
Most recently the House of Commons Disqualiﬁ cation Order 2010, SI 2010/762.
47
House of Commons (Disqualiﬁ cation) Act 1975, s 6.
48
House of Commons (Disqualiﬁ cation) Act 1975, s 8.
49
HC Deb 27 January 2011, col 449.

Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and Law17
The West Belfast by-election held on 9 June 2011 resulted in the return of Paul
Maskey, another member of Sinn Féin, joining the four other Sinn Féin Members
who have also not taken their seats at Westminster. Martin McGuinness, the Sinn
Féin Member for Mid Ulster, followed the same route in order to give up his dual
Stormont/Westminster mandate, leaving the House of Commons on 2 January
2013 by way of appointment as steward and bailiff of Her Majesty’s Manor of
Northstead in the county of York.
C. Recall of MPs?
The House’s power of expulsion was not deployed at any point throughout the
expenses scandal. The scandal resulted in a handful of criminal prosecutions and
it contributed to several political careers coming to an end at the 2010 general
election, either as a result of Members standing down, being de-selected or being
defeated.
50
One strand in the parties’ response to public dismay over the expenses
scandal was to hold out the possibility of voter-led dismissal of MPs between
general elections.
51

In December 2011, the Government published a White Paper including a
draft Bill on the Recall of MPs, which was then subjected to pre-legislative
scrutiny by the Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee.
52
The
Government’s draft Bill set out how a petition from constituents might result
in a by-election where a Member had been sentenced to a custodial sentence
of 12 months or less (the ‘first recall condition’). The draft Bill also left it
open to the House itself to decide how, when and why to trigger a recall peti-
tion (the ‘second recall condition’), as in effect an extension of the House’s
existing disciplinary powers. The White Paper, and the memorandum submit-
ted by the Clerk of the House to the Select Committee, set out how the new
power might be exercised, after a reasonable and fair process involving the
Committee on Standards and Privileges, in relation to serious wrongdoing by
a Member. The absence of explicit safeguards in the text of the Bill on the use
of the second recall condition was intended to avoid making any part of the
House’s self-disciplinary machinery subject to legal challenge in the courts.
The Political and Constitutional Reform Committee agreed that it would be
50
Dr Ian Gibson (Labour, Norwich North) left Parliament by taking the Chiltern Hundreds in
June 2009 after being de-selected in the wake of the expenses scandal. By doing so, he precipitated a
by-election, which was won by Chloe Smith (Conservative).
51
Conservative Party manifesto, Invitation to join the Government of Britain (2010) 65–66; Liberal
Democrat Party manifesto (2010) 89; Labour Party manifesto, A Fair Future for All (2010) 9; HM
Government, The Coalition Agreement: Our Programme for Government (May 2010) 27.
52
The Recall of MPs White Paper was published as Cm 8241.

18Liam Laurence Smyth
undesirable to define ‘serious wrongdoing’ in the Bill.
53
In its response to the
Committee’s report, the Government said it was grateful for the Committee’s
understanding that it would be undesirable to include in the Bill a definition
of ‘serious wrongdoing’ and noted that it was a view shared by the Clerk of
the House.
54
The Political and Constitutional Reform Committee was not persuaded there
was a gap in the House’s disciplinary procedures which needed to be filled by
the introduction of a statutory power of recall, as the House already had the
power to expel Members who were guilty of serious wrongdoing. Noting that
expulsion would not prevent the person concerned standing in the resulting by-
election, the Committee recommended that the Government should abandon
its plans to introduce a power of recall and that it should use the parliamentary
time this would free up to better effect.
55
The Government responded that it
remained committed to introducing a mechanism for the recall of MPs and that
it would consider further the Committee’s recommendations alongside detailed
and careful consultation with its stakeholders in determining its policy on
recall.
56
The Coalition Mid-term Review reaffirmed the Government’s intention
to bring forward legislation in this Parliament on this matter,
57
a commitment
which was reiterated in oral questions by the Deputy Prime Minister in January
2013.
58
D. Lay Members of the Commons’ Committee on Standards
In its response to the expenses scandal, the non-statutory Committee on Standards
in Public Life returned to a suggestion it had previously touched upon in 2002,
that the House of Commons self-regulatory machinery would be strengthened by
the inclusion of external members.
59
At that time, the Committee on Standards in
Public Life had found that there were significant hesitations in the House about
the acceptance of lay members in even an advisory capacity on the Committee
on Standards and Privileges. The Committee on Standards in Public Life in 2002
53
Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee, Recall of MPs (First Report) (HC 2012–13,
373) para 30.
54
Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, Recall of MPs: Government Response to the
Committee’s First Report of Session 2012–13 (Second Special Report) (HC 2012–13, 646) para 22.
55
Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee, Recall of MPs (First Report) (n 53) para 89.
56
Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, Recall of MPs: Government Response to the
Committee’s First Report of Session 2012–13 (Second Special report) (HC 2012–13 646) para 71.
57
The Coalition: Together in the National Interest (7 January 2013) 39.
58
HC Deb 8 January 2013, col 140.
59
Committee on Standards in Public Life, Standards of Conduct in the House of Commons (Eighth
Report) (Cm 5663, 2002).

Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and Law19
had not thought it necessary to recommend the inclusion of external members
at that stage.
60
In its November 2009 report on MPs’ expenses, the Committee on Standards in
Public Life now recommended that there should be at least two lay members who
had never been parliamentarians on the Standards and Privileges Committee of
the House of Commons.
61
The Committee on Standards in Public Life’s proposals
were swiftly endorsed by the Committee on Standards and Privileges, then under
the chairmanship of David Curry (Conservative, Skipton and Ripon).
62
On 2 December 2010, the House of Commons resolved to agree with the
principle that lay members should sit on the Committee on Standards and
Privileges, as set out in the twelfth report from the Committee on Standards in
Public Life, and invited the Procedure Committee to bring forward proposals for
its implementation.
63
Kevin Barron (Labour, Rother Valley), the new chair of the
Committee on Standards and Privileges, told the Procedure Committee that he
was ‘very much in favour’ of the addition of lay members.
64

In its report, the Procedure Committee drew attention to the risk that the
addition of lay members with full voting rights to a committee might call into
question whether the activities of such a committee would still be ‘proceedings
in Parliament’ and so covered by parliamentary privilege.
65
In his evidence
to the Procedure Committee, Professor Anthony Bradley had taken the view
that the courts would be likely to refuse judicial review and that the 2010 UK
Supreme Court judgment in R v Chaytor had shown that the courts would not
interfere with the right of each House to control its own proceedings.
66
The
Clerk of the House suggested to the Procedure Committee that lay members
could be added to the Committee on Standards
67
with less than full voting
rights but with substantial powers to ensure that the Committee could nei-
ther meet nor report without their participation.
68
The Procedure Committee
made several practical proposals, for the process of appointing lay members
and for splitting of the Committee on Standards and Privileges into separate
Committees, on Standards and of Privileges, but it remained neutral on voting
60
Committee on Standards in Public Life, Eighth Report (n 59) para 7.13.
61
Committee on Standards in Public Life, MPs’ Expenses and Allowances (Twelfth Report) (Cm
7724, 2009).
62
Committee on Standards and Privileges, Implementing the Twelfth Report from the Committee on
Standards in Public Life (Second Report) (HC 2009–10, 67).
63
HC Deb 2 December 2010, cols 995–1017.
64
Procedure Committee, Lay Membership of the Committee on Standards and Privileges (Sixth
Report) (HC 2010–12, 1606) para 44. A previous chair of the Standards and Privileges Committee, Sir
George Young (Conservative, North West Hampshire), who was Leader of the House from May 2010
to September 2012, had also supported the idea of having outside members sitting on the Standards
and Privileges Committee: Committee on Standards in Public Life, Twelfth Report (n 61) para 13.67.
65
Procedure Committee, Sixth Report (n 64).
66
Ibid, Ev 25.
67
See discussion in chs 4 and 7.
68
Procedure Committee, Sixth Report (n 64) Ev 1–5.

20Liam Laurence Smyth
rights for lay members, inviting the House to study with care the arguments
either way and to decide whether the Committee on Standards’ lay members
should be appointed with full voting rights or with more limited rights, pro-
tected by rules on quorum and publication of their opinion or advice.
69
In its response to the Procedure Committee, the Government’s view was
that the approach most likely to command the support of the House would be
to appoint lay members to the Committee on Standards in the first instance
on the basis proposed by the then Clerk of the House in his evidence to the
Procedure Committee. Under these proposals, the lay members would take
a full part in evidence-taking, including asking questions. Their position in
the deliberative work of the Committee would be protected by a provision
in Standing Orders requiring that the written opinion of each lay member
present at the relevant meeting on a report agreed by the Committee must
be published as part of any report by the Committee. The Government sug-
gested that there should be a further requirement in Standing Orders that the
Committee could not meet unless at least one lay member was present.
70
The
House of Commons amended its Standing Orders on 12 March 2012 and,
after a fair selection process, the three lay members nominated by the House
of Commons Commission were approved by the House of Commons on 13
December 2012.
71
The Government’s undertaking to consider the case for leg-
islating to place beyond doubt the position of a Committee on Standards with
lay members who did have full voting rights was fulfilled in its Parliamentary
Privilege Green Paper.
72

IV. PARLIAMENT AND THE COURTS
Exclusive cognisance, or exclusive jurisdiction, is not included among the rights
and privileges granted to or conferred upon the Commons at the Speaker’s
request. It is a constitutional principle that the conduct of the House’s own busi-
ness is not amenable to judicial review. In the case of British Railways Board v
Pickin, the House of Lords (acting in its judicial capacity) decided that it was not
lawful to impugn the validity of a statute by seeking to establish that Parliament,
in passing it, had been misled.
73
How far this exclusive cognisance may extend has
never been precisely defined; it is probable that nowadays the courts would take a
69
Procedure Committee, Sixth Report (n 64) para 53. The Procedure Committee noted that it
would of course be open to the House to reject both options. For more on lay members see ch 4.
70
Procedure Committee, Government Response to the Sixth Report from the Procedure Committee,
Lay Membership of the Committee on Standards and Privileges (Third Special Report) (HC 2010–12,
1869).
71
See House of Commons Commission, Lay Members of the New Standards Committee: Nomination
of Candidates (Report) (HC 2012–13, 709).
72
HM Government, Parliamentary Privilege (n 1) paras 232–44, with a draft clause on p 59.
73
Erskine May (n 2) 295; [1974] All ER 609. For a contrary view, expressed by Lord Denning MR,
see [1973] QB 219, 230.

Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and Law21
stricter view over a matter such as the applicability of the ordinary law of the land
on licensing hours to the Palace of Westminster.
74

A. The Application of Statutes to Parliament
Following the approach confirmed in R v Graham Campbell, ex p Herbert
75
the
courts presume that, in the absence of express provision or necessary implica-
tion, an Act does not apply to the internal workings of the Houses of Parliament.
Increasingly often, however, the authorities in both Houses pledge themselves to
comply fully with relevant legislation in fields such as employment law or health
and safety as if it were binding on them. This policy of voluntary application has
been gradually supplanted by provisions expressly applying statutes to Parliament
and parliament staff.
76
The sovereignty of Parliament and its relationship with the
courts are the subject of other chapters in this book.
77
Express provision in statute may include a reference to ‘proceedings in
Parliament’. In the absence of a generally applicable statutory definition of ‘pro-
ceedings’, it would presumably fall to a court to determine what actually consti-
tutes ‘proceedings’ if the point required decision in a litigated case. For example,
the requirements placed by section 29 of the Equality Act 2010 on service provid-
ers not to discriminate, harass or victimise persons requiring the service do not
apply, under paragraph 1 of Schedule 3 to the Act, to a function of Parliament or a
function exercisable in connection with proceedings in Parliament, provided that
what is done is in pursuance of a resolution or other deliberation of either House
or a committee of either House. The public sector equality duty under section 149
of the Act does not apply to the House of Commons or the House of Lords, or to
the exercise of functions in connection with proceedings in either House.
B. Privilege and Judicial Proceedings
i. Parliamentary Papers Act 1840
The claim that privilege extended to Parliament’s publications outside the House
was rejected by the courts in the first half of the nineteenth century.
78
Statutory
74
The inﬂ uence of R v Graham Campbell, ex p Herbert [1935] KB 594 is discussed by G Lock,
‘Statute Law and Case Law Applicable to Parliament’ in D Oliver and G Drewry (eds), The Law and
Parliament (London, Butterworths, 1998).
75
[1935] KB 594.
76
This paragraph follows D Greenberg (ed), Craies on Legislation, 8th edn (London, Sweet
and Maxwell, 2004) para 11.6.1. Examples of express application include s 65 of the Disability
Discrimination Act 1995 and s 36 of the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009.
77
Ch 12.
78
The case of Stockdale v Hansard (1839) 9 Ad & El 1; (1839) 112 ER 1112 and its ramiﬁ cations are
discussed in Erskine May (n 2) 288–90.

22Liam Laurence Smyth
immunity was given to such publications by the Parliamentary Papers Act 1840. It
is that Act which protects a report of a speech in Hansard, and all other proceed-
ings published on the authority of the House. As discussed in chapter two the
former prohibitions on quoting Hansard in court have been very substantially
relaxed, notably for certain contexts in relation to speeches by ministers. The pro-
tection afforded by the Parliamentary Papers Act is the reason why certain reports
of inquiries, which might otherwise attract libel proceedings, are published as
unopposed returns to orders of the House: for example, the Saville Report of the
Bloody Sunday Inquiry and the Hutton Report on the circumstances surrounding
the death of Dr David Kelly.
79
ii. Attendance as a Witness
The privilege of exemption of a Member from attending court as a witness, in
criminal as well as civil proceedings, has been asserted because Parliament has the
paramount right to the attendance and service of its Members.
80
A Member may,
however, choose to attend court in response to a subpoena even on a day on which
the House sits. On 23 May 2005, Mrs Sylvia Heal, one of the Deputy Speakers,
voluntarily gave evidence at the Bow Street magistrates’ court about the incursion
of pro-hunting demonstrators into the Chamber during a sitting of the House on
15 September 2004.
iii. Jury Service
Section 321 of Criminal Justice Act 2003 provides for Schedule 33 to the Act to
have effect. Among the effects of that Schedule was the repeal of section 9(1) of
and Part III of Schedule 1 to the Juries Act 1974, which had restated in statu-
tory form the ancient parliamentary privilege of exemption from jury service,
applicable to Members and officers of either House of Parliament.
81
MPs and
parliamentary staff are now just as liable to be summoned to perform jury service
as other citizens. The risk of jury service disrupting the work of Parliament is
mitigated by administrative practice: Members of Parliament who seek excusal
of jury service on the grounds of parliamentary duties are to be offered deferral
in the first instance. If a Member feels that it would be inappropriate to do jury
service in the Member’s own constituency, then the Member should be allowed
to do jury service elsewhere. The Speaker of the House of Commons and his
79
Report of the Bloody Sunday Inquiry (HC 2009–10, 29 -I to –IX and HC 30); Lord Hutton,
Report of the Inquiry into the Circumstances Surrounding the Death of Dr David Kelly CMG (HC
2003–04, 247).
80
Erskine May (n 2) 248.
81
Although the term ‘ofﬁ cers’ of either House was not deﬁ ned in statute, in the context of exemp-
tion from jury service the term ‘ofﬁ cer’ had come to embrace all employees of the House of Commons
Commission. A comparably broad deﬁ nition covered all House of Lords staff.

Privilege, Exclusive Cognisance and Law23
deputies should in the first instance be deferred to a time when Parliament is
not sitting, because of the difficulties their absence from the House would cause.
Both of these concessions are subject to the normal expectation that everyone
summoned for jury service will serve at the time for which they are summoned.
Ministry of Justice guidelines stipulate that excusal from jury service should be
reserved only for those cases where the jury summoning officer is satisfied that it
would be unreasonable to require the person to serve at any time within the fol-
lowing 12 months.
iv. Service of Court Papers
The serving or executing civil or criminal process within the precincts of either
House while the House is sitting without obtaining the leave of the House is a
contempt.
82
The Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege’s view was that the
main purpose of this rule was to protect Members and others who attended either
House from service within the House being used for publicity-seeking purposes,
concluding that ‘Such activity would be an abuse of the precincts of Parliament’.
83

In 1973 a possible contempt was referred to the Committee of Privileges. The
Committee decided that a contempt had been committed by the solicitors’ clerk
who delivered a copy of a writ to Ray Carter (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield),
but it accepted that in the circumstances no contempt had been intended. The
Committee warned that intrusion into the precincts for the purpose of delivering
such documents was an affront to the House and a serious abuse of the facilities
available to visitors.
84
The Clerk of the House’s comprehensive memorandum to
the Committee had recalled a number of cases, ancient and modern, including
an attempt by a member of the public to sue a Lords doorkeeper over the loss of
an umbrella.
85
An earlier Committee of Privileges had found that a Westminster
police inspector had committed a breach of privilege in serving papers on the
Speaker’s Secretary relating to motoring offences he had allegedly committed in
Shropshire.
86
The Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege considered that the rule
against the formal service of court papers on the precincts did not impede the
administration of justice, arguing that if personal service elsewhere was difficult,
other alternatives, such as postal service or substituted service, were readily avail-
able. The Joint Committee recommended not only that the rule against service
in person should be retained but also that it ought to be extended to apply at
82
Erskine May (n 2) 261.
83
Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege, Report (n 1) para 334.
84
Committee of Privileges, Complaint of the Serving of a Writ upon a Member within the Precincts
of the House (First Report) (HC 1972–73, 144) para 4.
85
Case of John Bell (1827) in the Committee of Privileges, Complaint of the Serving of a Writ upon
a Member within the Precincts of the House (First Report) (n 84) 12.
86
Committee of Privileges, Report (HC 1945–46, 31).

24Liam Laurence Smyth
all times, irrespective of whether Parliament was sitting. On the other hand, the
Joint Committee doubted whether service by post on a sitting day could ever be
regarded as a contempt. The Joint Committee further recommended it should be
made clear that service by post was not a contempt.
87
As no cases of complaints
about service of court documents by post have surfaced since the Joint Committee
reported in 1999, its view remains persuasive.
V. ATTEMPTS TO REFORM PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE
A. The Background: Some History
i. Duncan Sandys and Official Secrets
On 27 June 1938, Mr Duncan Sandys (Conservative, Norwood) raised a complaint
on the floor of the House, as a matter of privilege, that the Attorney-General had
asked Mr Sandys about the ‘highly secret’ sources of information Mr Sandys had
evidently used in a draft of a parliamentary question (about shortages of anti-
aircraft guns) which Mr Sandys had enclosed in a letter to the Secretary of State
for War. On 30 June 1938 the House referred the detail of Mr Sandys’s allega-
tions and the general question of the applicability of the Official Secrets Acts
to Members to a select committee on the Official Secrets Act.
88
The House of
Commons agreed with the 1938–39 Select Committee on the Official Secrets Act
that the working definition of ‘proceedings’ should be extended to communica-
tions between one Member and another or between a Member and a minister so
closely related to some matter pending in or expected to be brought before the
House that they form part of the business of the House.
89
ii. The Strauss Case
In 1958 the House of Commons Committee of Privileges concluded that a letter
written by George Strauss (Labour, Vauxhall) to the Paymaster General about the
London Electricity Board was a ‘proceeding in Parliament’ and that accordingly
the Member could not be prosecuted for allegedly defamatory comments in the
letter. The Committee also found that, in threatening a libel action against the
Member, both the Board and its solicitors had committed a breach of privilege.
By a narrow margin of 218 to 213, the House of Commons rejected a motion
agreeing with the Committee’s report. An amendment declaring that Mr Strauss’
letter was not a proceeding in Parliament and that no breach of privilege had been
87
Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege, Report (n 1) para 335.
88
Reports from the Select Committee on the Ofﬁ cial Secrets Act, HC 146 and HC 173 of Session
1937–38, and HC 101 of 1938–39.
89
HC Deb 21 November 1939, cols 1071–84.

Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:

Gerijmd na Karl en Zita’s staatsgreep op 22 October 1921.
(Zie de aanteekening op bl. 99)

O, keizerlijke kwibus! Kwast,
Met Zita aan je zij!
Jan Klaassen uit de poppenkast
Deed nooit zoo mal als jij.
Per vliegmachine kwam je an,
En hebt met man en macht,
Met haar de heele ratteplan
In rep en roer gebracht.
Maar van een „Schlager” had ’t niet veel —
Die kluchtspel-heldendaad!
Je kreeg van ’t volk, integendeel
Rott’ appels in ’t gelaat.
Je brak je woord. Dat doet men meer.
Daar zegt geen mensch iets van;
Voor vorsten geldt een andre eer
Dan voor den mindren man.
Maar nu is ’t knersing en geween,
Acherm! Wat zal je doen?
De schrik zit — lees ik — in je been,
De moed zit in je schoen.
Och, eiglijk is het medelij,
Dat ons het hart vervult,
Want deze potsenmakerij
Is niet je eigen schuld.
Neen. Evenals maar al te vaak
In dezen rommeltijd
Door prikkelfilms tot roof en braak
Het „boefje” werd verleid......
Zooals zoo meenge montre maagd,
Onschuldig, zoet en zacht,

Door ’t hitsend trilbeeld opgejaagd,
Tot zonde werd gebracht —
Zoo is de schuld van ’t droevig lot
(Waakt, ouders, die dit leest!!)
Van dezen armen Don Quichot
De BIOSKOOP geweest!
53. MIES, CHARIVARIUS, DE KANARIE EN DE OORLOG.

Mies, mijn mooie, grijze poesje,
Ligt genoeglijk in haar soesje
Voor mijn open haard,
Op het warme, wollen kleedje.
Kijk, zij droomt — beweegt een beetje
’t Puntje van haar staart.
Mies ontwaakt, en wascht haar snoetje;
Dan, behoedzaam, voet-voor-voetje,
Sluipt zij naar mij toe.
Hoepla! Plotseling springt zij op je!
Spint verheugd, en geeft een kopje:
Mies is blij te moe.
Ik niet minder, dat begrijpje!
Met mijn poes en met mijn pijpje,
Onder ’n dak van rook!
’k Streel het zachte zijden velletje;
Mies en ik, wij zijn een stelletje,
Mies is lui — ik ook.
’t Is zoo rustig, ’t is zoo stille,
Is ’t geen plaatje? geen idylle?
Vriendschap, Vreugd en Vree.
En we denken geen van beiden
Aan het slachten en het strijden,
En het Wereld-wee......
’k Soes wat over „Charivari”......
Kijk, daar huppelt mijn kanarie
Uit zijn open kooi.
Mies springt eensklaps van mijn schoot en
Heft, met tijgeraard, haar poot, en......
Pats! Zij heeft haar prooi!
’t Bloed druipt tappelings langs haar kaken,
’k Hoor de broze beentjes kraken,

j ,
Hoe ’k die kat verwensch!
’k Tracht een scheldwoord te verzinnen,
Wacht! daar schiet m’ er een te binnen:
Schaamje, Mies! Jij... MENSCH!!
54. O! O! O!
Stemmings-Rijm.

Het is griezlig weer.
Hu. De regen pletst neer.
En de wind schudt de deur en de ruiten.
Je kamer is guur.
Zonder licht. Zonder vuur.
’t Is net zoo naar binnen als buiten.
Een warm kopje thee?
Kun je denken. O nee.
Daar gaat, snap je, veel te veel gas aan.
Je zit kil en krom.
Met een reisdeken om.
Een voetenzak. Handschoenen. Jas aan.
Je vrienden gaan zien?
Voor een praatje misschien?
Gezelligheid? Onzin. Illusie.
’t Prodit en prodat
Ben je gauw genoeg zat.
En het eindigt gewoonlijk met ruzie.
Landziekig en wee,
Slof je naar je café.
Voor de krant. Om een hapje te eten.
’n Partijtje biljart —
Wat dan ook. Om je smart
En je narigheid wat te vergeten.
Maar het licht is te mat.
Ja. En lees je nog wat,
Dan is ’t van de Krieg und kein Ende.
Je weet het al wel.
’t Is alles de hel.
En bloed. En bedrog. En ellende.
En het bruinbrood is grauw.
En het wittebrood blauw.

En oudbakken, al heet het ook „net versch.”
En het bier smaakt als inkt.
En de whisky, die stinkt.
De visch is goed voor de briketpers.
Je gaat maar weer heen.
Door het donker alleen.
Trapt in alles. En botst, op de hoeken.
Je stoot er een blauw.
Jij hem. En hij jou.
Razen. Tieren. En schelden. En vloeken.
Zoo zit je weer thuis.
Krats. Daar hoor je een muis.
Een muizeval? Rattekruid? Baat niet.
Hier faalt zelfs de kat.
Want je huis is te nat.
En ze deeglijk te luksburgen gaat niet.
D’r zit niets meer op,
Dan met mokkenden kop
Den dag met den nacht te verruilen.
Het land als de pest.
Ruk maar op. Naar je nest.
Diep onder de dekens. En huilen.
55. EEN FAILLISSEMENT.
Door het torpedo-werk van de Duitsche duikboot verdronken
meer dan 1600 personen. Het bericht van de heldendaad der
bemanning bracht over Duitschland, schrijft de Köln. Zeitung, „eine
jublende Freude.” Alle opvarenden verkregen het IJzeren Kruis.

Als de vrede is gesloten,
En de strijd gestreden is,
Als er bloeds genoeg vergoten,
Leeds genoeg geleden is;
Als de zwakke landman zwoegend
— Want de sterken zijn gedood —
’t Bloedgedrenkte land doorploegend
Op verminkte lijken stoot;
Als de tranen wat gedroogd zijn
Van de weduw en de wees,
De belastingen verhoogd zijn,
En de prijs van ’t brood en ’t vleesch;
Als het aantal werkelooze’
Niet meer weeklijks, daaglijks, stijgt,
En de werkman, na een pooze,
Hier of daar een plaatsje krijgt;
Als de zaken weer gaan loopen,
En de rust is weergekeerd —
Hebben w’allen, laat ons hopen,
Eéne wijze les geleerd:
Dat in heel ons brave leven
Eigenbaat, -belang, gewin,
Drijfveer is van al ons streven —
Nimmer God of Godsdienstzin,
En dat Vroomheid, Recht en Waarheid,
— Noem ’t maar „Godsdienst” voor ’t gemak —
Liggen — ’t blijkt met groote klaarheid —
Boven aan het oppervlak.
Want zoodra we ’t wenschelijk achten
Voor het winnen van den strijd,

Bannen w’ alle Godsgedachten,
Daarvoor is er dan geen tijd.
En, al roepend: Heere, Heere!
Zett’ we Godsdienst aan den kant;
Moord en doodslag komt in eere,
En de Bijbel wordt verbrand.
Ja, het universum staat dan
Op zijn kop, zoo lijkt het wel:
In den Hemel huist de Satan,
En de Heer is in de hel.
Want de felste Bloedgebeden,
Tot onz’ Ouden God gericht,
Stijgen... loodrecht naar beneden!
Bidden blijft maar Christenplicht.
Ieder van de Tien Geboden
Overtreden w’ elken dag;
Rooven, branden, liegen, dooden,
Zelfs verstikken — alles mag.
Wie, vervuld van ’t „Onze Vader”,
Doet, wat Jezus heeft geleerd,
Wordt direkt, als landverrader,
Afgemaakt — gefusilleerd.
„Hebt uw vijand lief, mijn kinderen!”
Sprak de man van Nazareth;
Maar de luint zegt tot zijn mindren:
„Prikt ’m met je bajonet!”
En de krant bezielt gedurig
Den soldaat met haat en nijd;
Zeer terecht: dat maakt hem vurig
En bloeddorstig in den strijd.
JackofKarldiethuiszooknusjes

Jack of Karl, die thuis zoo knusjes
Met zijn broertjes samenzat,
Steeds iets meebracht voor zijn zusjes,
Als hij thuiskwam, uit de stad...
Kijk, daar staat hij, d’arme jongen...
Stil!... nou moet je handig zijn...
Steek ’m daar... net naast z’n longen!...
Mooi!!... hij kronkelt zich van pijn!
Prik ’m nog eens!... Kijk ’m spartelen!...
Hak z’n voet af!... of z’n hand!...
Lekker eiglijk wel, dat martelen...!
’t Mag nu. ’t Is voor ’t Vaderland!!
Dood je er één — je wordt bewonderd,
Tien — dan krijg j’ een lintje thuis,
Maar verzuip j’ ’r zestienhonderd,
Dan verdien je ’t IJzeren Kruis.
Ja, ’t was „schitterend”, dat erken ik,
Zestienhonderd! Hoor je ’t wel?
Zelfs ’t vergaan van de Titanic
Was hierbij maar kinderspel.
Hoor ze jammeren... huilen... Luister!
Hijgend, hunkrend naar wat lucht,
Tot ze zinken naar het duister,
Met een laatste droeve zucht...
Hoort! De maar’ verkondigt luide:
„Zestienhonderd tegelijk!!”
En een jubelende Freude
Spreidt zich over ’t gansche rijk.
Al de Hoofden van de Staten,
Keizer, Koning, President,
Tsaar, Ministers, Diplomaten,
UithetWitboekwelbekend

Uit het Witboek welbekend,
Zij, die verantwoordlijk waren
Voor het Wereld-moordnaars-werk,
Waren ook de steunpilaren
Van de Christelijke Kerk.
Dominees, pastoors, rabbijnen,
Och, wat staat je zaakje zwak!
’k Zou maar stiekempjes verdwijnen,
Gaat maar in ’n ander vak!
’k Stel je voor om dit te zeggen:
Daar de Godsdienst is verjaard,
En ’t Geloof het af moest leggen,
Wordt de Kerk failliet verklaard.
56. WIJ DUITSCHERS, VOORHEEN EN THANS.
Helfferich in den Rijksdag, 21 April ’21: „Het Verdrag van
Versailles is gegrondvest op den leugen van Duitschland’s schuld
aan den oorlog.”
Dr. Riesser: „Het staat voor den geschiedschrijver vast, dat
Duitschland alles gedaan heeft wat binnen zijn bereik lag om der
uitgeputte wereld vrede te brengen.”

Wij Duitschers stonden steeds vooraan — wij staan er nog.
De schurken schoolden saam, en legden listig lagen,
Om ons uit onze hooge standplaats te verjagen;
Hun bondgenooten waren: leugen en bedrog.
Ook Kautsky is een booswicht en een leugenaar,
Zijn boek, en al wat dergelijks geopenbaard is,
Een Duitscher neemt die lasterpraat voor wat ze waard is;
Wij blijven bij onze oude leus: „Es ist nicht wahr!”
Wie spreekt van Duitschland’s schuld? Produkt van ’s vijands brein!
De ware Duitscher werpt het van zich — lacht er mede!
Neen, krijgt de uitgeputte wereld eenmaal weder vrede,
Dan zal ’t aan ons, aan ons alleen te danken zijn.
En — is de vijand door den oorlog niet bekeerd,
Wij evenmin. Wij pochen voort, het hoofd geheven,
Wij zijn hetzelfde volk van voor den krijg gebleven.
Wij hebben niets bedacht, begrepen — niets geleerd.
57. HOOG BEZOEK.
Iambisch-choriambische Ode aan de Pers, bedoeld als scandeer-oefening voor de
Gymnasiale jeugd.
Hoog bezoek. Vergezeld van zijn oom, Prins Heinrich van Pruisen,
zijn adjudant en den burgemeester van Wieringen, bracht de ex-
kroonprins van Duitschland Zaterdagmiddag een bezoek aan huize
Duinwijk alhier, om zich door zijn tandarts te laten behandelen. Na
een verblijf van eenige uren op Duinwijk aanvaardde het
gezelschap, in 2 auto’s gezeten, den terugtocht naar Wieringen. —
O. H. C.

Het Plebs, en zijn slavin, de Pers,
Vergapen zich aan
Den Schijn.
Dat is ’t, waaraan mijn Ruize-vers
Van heden gewijd
Zal zijn.
Ex-kroonprins, arme kerel, zeg,
’k Heb medelij, man,
Met jou;
Daar zit je vele mijlen weg,
Gescheiden van kroost,
En vrouw.
Je bent gevangen in een oord,
Daar erregens aan
De pool,
Waarvan geen mensch ooit had gehoord,
Dan soms in de les,
Op school.
De streek is dor als een woestijn,
Verlaten en kil,
En kaal;
Je huis is somber, grauw en klein,
Naar, burgerlijk en
Banaal.
Met de notab’len van ’t gehucht,
Een kringetje, klein,
En triest,
Speel j’ elken avond, met een zucht,
Een robbertje bridge,
Of whist.
Je gaat naar Pa, maar nooit alleen;
Eerst vraag j’ of het mag

gj g
Aan Ruys;
Dan brengt m’neer Kan j’r aan ’t handje heen,
En net zoo terug,
Naar huis.
Je droomde j’eens een ander lot......
Jou wachtte een
Keizerskroon!
Je vader hield zich voor een god,
En jou voor een
Godenzoon......
Omringd van vleiers groeide j’op,
Je zwelgd’ in hun hoofsch
Gelal;
Jij, jeugdig godje in den dop,
Beheerscher — ééns! — van
’t Heelal!
Zoo peinzend sta je aan den dijk,
Spuwt kringetjes in
De sloot;
Je voelt jezelf een levend lijk,
Een mummie, lang voor
Je dood.
Hoor! Troost je met dit zoet bedrog,
Verongelukt schip
Op ’t strand!
Eén lichtstraal, stumper, blijft je nog:
De leutertaal van
De krant.
Dat ’t dan met gulden lettren sta
In ’t princelijk
Levensboek:
„Wanneer ik naar Mijn tandarts ga,
Danheetdatnog

Dan heet dat nog
HOOG BEZOEK.”
58. DE BRIEF VAN DEN VADER.
Een Nachtgedachte.

Mijn zoon, als deze woorden u bereiken,
Heb ik mijns levens laatste daad gedaan.
Voor ’t naad’rend Noodlot heb ik willen wijken,
Ik ben vrijwillig in den dood gegaan.
Stil is de nacht. De menschen slapen allen.
En, eenzaam in dit kille, vreemde land
Zit ik ter neer, verlaten en vervallen;
Ik ben alleen, en schrijf met vaste hand.
Ik heb, vol fantasie van vooze vinding,
Mijn leven in één dwazen droom geleid,
Een droom van schitring, schijnschoon en verblinding.
Van prinsenpraal en heerschersheerlijkheid.
Ik heb u grootgebracht in wanbegrippen,
Ik leidde u als een dwaas het hollend paard.
En toen ik mij de teugels liet ontglippen,
Toen rende ’t ros in nog verdolder vaart.
Ik heb een dwaalleer aan mijn kind verkondigd,
Ik leerde u lust tot ijdlen roem en macht;
Mijn zoon, wij hebben beiden zwaar gezondigd —
Mijn schuldenlast was grooter dan mijn kracht.
Wie peilt het bloed, gevloeid op d’ aard in stroomen?
Wie telt de jonge doôn, in d’ aard gelegd?
Eén woord had al dat wereldwee voorkomen,
Eén woord van mij. Ik heb het niet gezegd.
Wat ik de laatste stonden heb geleden,
Toen het te dagen in mijn hart begon,
Was meer dan in zijn felste wraakgebeden
Mijn vijand van den Wreker vragen kon.
Zooals de schipper, ’t zinkend schip besturend,
Vergeefs een haven zoekt in rots’ge kust,

Geen lichtstraal speurt hij, door het duister turend...
Zóó angstig zocht mijn zieke ziel naar rust.
Laat dan mijn doode stemme tot u spreken,
U wacht niets meer dan schande, smaad en leed.
Gij kunt met eigen hand uw boeien breken,
Volvoer de daad — doe wat uw vader deed.
59. HOEZEE!
„Een hoezee! voor de gezagvoerders, stuurlieden en matrozen
onzer koopvaardij- en visschersvloot, die zee blijven houden
niettegenstaande de gevaren toenemen, en dagelijks hun leven
wagen in dienst van het vaderland. In dienst van het vaderland;
want wat zou er van Nederland worden, zoo de zeeman zijn bedrijf
moest staken?”
(Vragen des Tijds.)

Nu klinke de zang met een juichenden klank,
Op Holland, zing jubelend mee!
Wij brengen ze lof, en wij brengen ze dank,
De moedige mannen der zee.
De geest van de vaderen is niet gebluscht,
Klein Holland, mijn Holland, is groot!
Wij wachten de toekomst getroost en gerust,
Een hoezee! een hoezee! voor de vloot.
Het is niet gedoofd het Oud-Hollandsche vier,
Al schijnen wij soms in den dut,
Bij bittere borrels en Heinekensbier,
Er zit in ons landje nog fut.
Er zit nog wel kracht in het Hollandsche bloed,
Al bruist het niet altijd — wat nood!
Wij tellen nog mannen met montere moed,
Een hoezee! een hoezee! voor de vloot.
Daar gaan ze weer scheep, en ze zeggen g’n dag
Aan d’r vrouw, aan kind en aan broer.
Ze reven de zeilen, ze hijschen de vlag,
En de stuurman staat stram aan het roer.
„Ik, schipper, naast God, van me schip, voer me vracht,
En me volk, als het moet naar den dood;
Wij doen wat het vaderland wil, en verwacht......”
Een hoezee! een hoezee! voor de vloot!
(Dit Rijm is, op muziek gezet — zang en piano — afzonderlijk uitgegeven).

IV. TAAL.
1. TAAL-RIJM.
Opgedragen aan den vreemdeling, die Hollandsch leert.

O, vreemdeling, die onze taal bestudeert,
Lees verder. Ik wed dat mijn Rijm je wat leert.
’k Hoop niet, dat de studie je tegen zal vallen,
Zoo zegt men bal — ballen, maar, ach! niet: dal — dallen.
En ’t enkelvoud, vreemdling, van koeien is: koe,
Maar de boef draagt wel boeien, de drenkling geen boe.
En Vondel, je weet het, schreef prachtige reien,
Maar niemand bestelt in een lunchroom ooit eien.
En kinden is niets, noch ook winderen — wel lammeren,
Wel: wortelen, geen eikelen, noch borstelen of kammeren.
Zoo kom je van zelf op de lastigste paderen:
Rad — reden? Stad — staden? Is vad stam van vaderen?
Ook heb je wel potten, maar nergens zijn slotten,
En niemand zegt roten, marmoten of lotten.
De boer houdt geen haanders, maar zeker wel hoenderen,
En draagt op het land meestal klompen — nooit schoenderen.
Het meervoud van krent is eenvoudigweg: krenten,
Maar: vent, in het meervoud, is kerels — niet: venten.
Leer ook de geslachten, mijn leerling, vroegtijdig:
De vrouwen zijn vrouwlijk, maar wijf is onzijdig.
O ja, dat is waar, ’k zou het haast nog vergeten:
Een oud wijf is mannelijk — je moet het maar weten!
Zoo stelde Verheul al het onderscheid vast
Tusschen een gast, de gast, en — eilacie! — het gast.
Zeg: naaister, maar schilderster moet je niet zegge’,
Ook niet koninges of dievin of vriendegge.
Dan deminutiva, als scheepje van schip;
Heeft Jantj’ al een zweepje — zijn pa heeft geen zwip.
En ’k weet het, lief kind, met gevogelte dweep je,
Maar toon nu geen lippetje om dit taai-droge sneepje.
Ook werkwoorden moet je met zorg bestudeeren,
Want als je niet oppast, dan scheur’ je je kleeren.
Je zult al wel weten — ik hoop, dat je ’t wist,
Dat je heden zult eten, maar gisteren niet ist.
Toen gisteren de torenklok twaalf had geslagen,
Zeg, ben je toen rustig naar huis toe gegagen?

Gezegd is niet beter gezegd dan: gezeid,
Maar nooit is er nog naar een drenkling gedreid.
Och, als je ’t maar weet, is ’t gemaklijk genoeg;
Ik joeg bij ’t behang naar een muisje dat knoeg.
En als je in vervelend gezelschap haast sliep,
Heeft niemand gemerkt, dat je heimelijk giep.
Ik denk ook wel niet, dat je vaak hebt gezocht
Naar een post in je boek, die verkeerd was gebocht.
Bedenk, vriend, als j’ in verontwaardiging raakt,
Dat niet wan wordt getrouwd hij, die nacht heeft gebraakt.
Ik vraag j’ of je hier wel eens ooit aan gedacht hebt,
En of je ’r je aandacht genoeg aan geschacht hebt?
En dan — ’t is niet erg, als je j’ even vergist —
Wat zeg je: „dank wijtte”, „dank weet”, of „dank wist”?
Leer ook de getallen, o vreemdling, aandachtig:
Zeg: vijftig en zestig — niet drietig en achtig.
Ook d’ uitspraak is soms nog een moeielijk ding,
Immers: beving je ooit van de angst een beving?
En hoorde j’ ooit iemand in ’t Hollandsch bevelen,
Een vocht naar een lager staand vat te hevelen?
Al schrijf je ook Gorinchem, spreek het uit: Gorkum,
Maar schrijf in vergissing niet Borinchem voor Borkum.
En teeder is zeker hetzelfde als teer,
Maar noem nooit een reeder bij ongeluk: reer.
Misschien ben je ’t Hollandsch in zoover al meester,
Dat je heester niet zoo maar laat rijmen op zeester.
En heb je de klemtoon al zoo goed te pakken,
Dat je lieden, die slabakken, gooit met slabakken?
En ’t enkelvoud, hoe zeg je dat dan wel? slabak?
En rijmt dat op tabak? Of beter op klabak?
En rijmt dit precies: „Als Marie gelei maakt,
Dan vind ik, dat die naar een spiegelei smaakt?”
Neen, houd j’ aan de regels, al ben je een vrijgeest,
En zeg niet gelei-taart zoowat als gelei-geest —
Zoodat ’k maar wil zeggen, aan ’t eind van mijn lied:
Het Hollandsch is heusch nog zoo makkelijk niet.

2. ED-DIJM.
Oefening voor lijders aan keelpijn, Engelsche, Italiaansche, zang-
en tooneel-les.

Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.
More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge
connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and
personal growth every day!
ebookbell.com

Parliament And The Law Alexander Horne Gavin Drewry Dawn Oliver Editors

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Tags

Categories

Download

Quick Actions

Statistics

Related Slideshows

Parliament And The Law Alexander Horne Gavin Drewry Dawn Oliver Editors

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 5

Slide 6

Slide 7

Slide 8

Slide 9

Slide 11

Slide 12

Slide 13

Slide 14

Slide 15

Slide 16

Slide 17

Slide 19

Slide 20

Slide 21

Slide 22

Slide 23

Slide 24

Slide 25

Slide 26

Slide 27

Slide 28

Slide 29

Slide 30

Slide 31

Slide 32

Slide 33

Slide 34

Slide 35

Slide 36

Slide 37

Slide 38

Slide 39

Slide 40

Slide 41

Slide 42

Slide 43

Slide 44

Slide 45

Slide 46

Slide 47

Slide 48

Slide 49

Slide 50

Slide 51

Slide 52

Slide 53

Slide 54

Slide 55

Slide 56

Slide 57

Slide 58

Slide 59

Slide 60

Slide 61

Slide 62

Slide 63

Slide 64

Slide 65

Slide 66

Slide 67

Slide 68

Slide 69

Slide 70

Slide 71

Slide 72

Slide 73

Slide 74

Slide 75

Slide 76

Slide 77

Slide 78

Tags

Categories