Privilege / Reflections on a Member

Alleged defamatory letter sent by a public servant to Members

Debates pp. 27944-5

Background

On October 4, Mr. Domm (Peterborough) rose on a question of privilege to denounce the comments, which he claims are defamatory, made about him in a letter sent to the Prime Minister and to various Members by a member of the Metric Commission. Mr. Domm said that he was prepared to move a motion to summon the public servant concerned to appear before the House to make an official apology. After allowing the Member to by-pass the obligation to raise the question of privilege at the first opportunity and after listening to Members' comments, the Speaker took the matter under consideration and ruled a few days later.

Issue

Do the comments which the Member claims prevented him from discharging his duties constitute a question of privilege?

Decision

No. There is no prima facie question of privilege.

Reasons given by the Speaker

Members who participate in a public debate outside the House enjoy no special protection. Privilege can only be claimed in relation to a parliamentary proceeding. Privilege is not designed to protect Members "from criticism, however strong, even when the language used might be excessive." In the present case, the Member has not been threatened, his movements have not been obstructed and his freedom of speech and action has not been inhibited. As to whether disciplinary measures should be taken with regard to an official, it is up to the Government to decide.

Sources cited

Debates, March 1, 1982, pp. 15473-4; March 22, 1983, pp. 24027-8.

United Kingdom, House of Commons, Select Committee on Parliamentary Privilege, Report, June 16, 1964, p. vi.

References

Debates, October 4, 1983, pp. 27726-31.