Contempt of Parliament

MaizieD very few Mps seem to have commented adversely and in fairness they were close friends of BJ. I wouldn’t say that the language used was that bad given the strength of feeling that was present at that time. In fact witch hunt and kangaroo court doesn’t fill me with horror. If Parliament is offended then doubtless it will impose some sanction but it really isn’t doing itself any favours.

ronib

Maizie D only future historians will be able to assess this whole debacle.
I note that comments are quoted dated 9th June when the draft report had been written. There’s no way that comments then could be presented as intimidatory or actively preventing the completion of the report.
At the end of the day the House of Commons can produce as many reports and add on reports as it likes - we don’t have to be sucked into yet another psychodrama. We can make our own judgments.

We are making our own judgments ronib and you’re in the minority, not just on this thread but in the media, in parliament, and within the Tory Party. Intimidating people who present a factual, evidence based report at the request of parliament is beyond the pale - and is actually incredible when the nominated MPs from your own party, who form a majority on that committee are bombarded with threats.

Casdon great thank you 😊 it proves I can still think.

eazybee

I cannot imagine Jacob Rees-Mogg ever committing an undisciplined use of language.
In my opinion the Privileges Committee are pursuing their privileges to the nth degree, quite unnecessarily, and they are contemptible.

JRM is a loathsome, sneering man with no regard for democracy, don't be fooled by his faux 'gentleman' appearance. He knew what he was saying, took the risk and should take the consequences. IMO

The Report is only 14 pages long, if anyone wants to read it:

committees.parliament.uk/publications/40679/documents/198237/default/

ronib

Maizie D only future historians will be able to assess this whole debacle.
I note that comments are quoted dated 9th June when the draft report had been written. There’s no way that comments then could be presented as intimidatory or actively preventing the completion of the report.
At the end of the day the House of Commons can produce as many reports and add on reports as it likes - we don’t have to be sucked into yet another psychodrama. We can make our own judgments.

It's quite clear that comments (including the write in campaign) intended to pressure members of the Committee to issue a report acceptable to BoJo's friends were a contempt (of the Commons, not the Committee) and that applies to comments made on or after 9 June while the draft report was being considered for finalising. The privileges of the Commons - which the Committee is there to uphold - are fundamental to free, unfettered and unintimidated discussion by our elected representatives. They have been long fought for and the struggle to maintain them must be sustained. I congratulate the Committee.

HousePlantQueen

eazybee

I cannot imagine Jacob Rees-Mogg ever committing an undisciplined use of language.
In my opinion the Privileges Committee are pursuing their privileges to the nth degree, quite unnecessarily, and they are contemptible.

JRM is a loathsome, sneering man with no regard for democracy, don't be fooled by his faux 'gentleman' appearance. He knew what he was saying, took the risk and should take the consequences. IMO

Didn’t he filibuster one day to stop a bill to protect vulnerable women going through parliament. I’m sure that Jess Phillips referred back to it once.

eazybee

I cannot imagine Jacob Rees-Mogg ever committing an undisciplined use of language.
In my opinion the Privileges Committee are pursuing their privileges to the nth degree, quite unnecessarily, and they are contemptible.

Absolutely. Harmans face when Rees Mogg was talking in Parliament about the committee. He said exactly that, and that we weren't living in a dictatorship where opinions should not be aired. He wanted a free and open discussion. Her face looked like she swallowed sour milk. This is the result, can't take it,but likes to give it out.

Could you provide a clip of that please, Freya? I am not sure when he did this? It wasn’t, of course, in the debate on the Committee’s recommendations, when his only intervention was this

news.sky.com/video/i-think-thats-a-mic-drop-jacob-rees-mogg-is-heard-during-debate-on-boris-johnson-partygate-report-12905589

My interpretation was exactly the opposite. After Harman had replied, it was Rees-Mogg who looked as though he'd bathed in sour milk.

Harriet Harman, the "Mother of the House" hasan impeccible grasp of correct procedure. She checked with the government and was assured that they had confidence in her as Chairman of the Privileges Committee..

She is a highly experienced, well respected and dignified MP, not something we could say about Jacob Rees Mogg

Freya5

eazybee

I cannot imagine Jacob Rees-Mogg ever committing an undisciplined use of language.
In my opinion the Privileges Committee are pursuing their privileges to the nth degree, quite unnecessarily, and they are contemptible.

Absolutely. Harmans face when Rees Mogg was talking in Parliament about the committee. He said exactly that, and that we weren't living in a dictatorship where opinions should not be aired. He wanted a free and open discussion. Her face looked like she swallowed sour milk. This is the result, can't take it,but likes to give it out.

Is that when he said that she shouldn’t have chaired the committee and she pointed out that she had spoken to the government about it and it was agreed unanimously that it was fine for her to chair it. This was during the debate: the one where Rees Mogg defended Johnson to the hilt. And then abstained on the vote.

ronib

It’s very important for Mps to be allowed to respectfully comment on matters which are important to them. I don’t expect every mp to agree with every committee and it’s vital for divergent voices to be heard.
I don’t think that the Privileges Committee was in any way prevented from doing its work by Rees Mogg, Cruddas and Dorries. It continues to do its work and I am expecting some censure of mps in yet another report.

The Privileges Commitee Special Report refers to Erskin May which defines a contempt in this way:

Any act or omission which obstructs or impedes either House of Parliament in the performance of its functions or which obstructs or impedes any member or officer of such house in the discharge of their duty or which has a tendency directly or indirectly to produce such results maybe treated as a contemt even though there is no precedent of the offense. It is there for impossible to list every act which might be considered to amount to a contemt as parliamentary privilege is a living concept.

Siope

Could you provide a clip of that please, Freya? I am not sure when he did this? It wasn’t, of course, in the debate on the Committee’s recommendations, when his only intervention was this

news.sky.com/video/i-think-thats-a-mic-drop-jacob-rees-mogg-is-heard-during-debate-on-boris-johnson-partygate-report-12905589

Was on you tube, will try and find it.

I think there is a lack of understanding free speech. It is not an absolute right. There are limitations to ensure that it is not exercised in a way which causes harm to others.

The seat of our democracy is Parliament.

The House of Commons voted for the Priviledges Committee to carry out an inquiry - unanimously.

The House of Commons approved a motion to appoint Harriet to the Committee on the understanding that she would take the role of Chair - unanimously.

The Committee is comprised of seven MPs: four Conservative, two Labour and one SNP. They are elected to serve on the Committee by the House of Commons, in proportion to the parties’ representation in the House.

Whatever any individual may think, they do not, as was explained above, have the right to say just what they like if it can be seen as contempt of Parliament.

Some things are bigger than than the individual and the seat of democracy is one of them.

We can only have freedom of speech if people don’t abuse it.

The idea that any one can say anything no matter what the consequences seems to have a very strong hold.

Yet we all know you can be sued for slander. If you disrupt a court you can be jailed. If you verbally threaten or spew hate speech you can jailed.

Equally, if you are an MP and try to stop elected members carrying out the will of Parliament you should, at the very least, be held to account.

It’s going to be discussed in parliament next Monday…I’m having my new windows filleted but I hope I’ll get to watch it. Not sure what time though.

Good post DAR, just to add, the issue at the heart of this was that the named people also tried to influence others eg got emails circulated and generally tried to undermine the work and decisions of the PC.

Having re-watched Boris, the Lord and Russian Spies last night I am truly grateful that BoJo is no longer PM and an MP and that the Privileges Committee proved fearless and independent in condemning his behaviour. Those who continue to support him should examine their own views on the nature of democracy, the constitution and the rule of law. I hope the Commons will approve their recent report and refer the Lords who intervened to the HofL for investigation.

ronib

MaizieD very few Mps seem to have commented adversely and in fairness they were close friends of BJ. I wouldn’t say that the language used was that bad given the strength of feeling that was present at that time. In fact witch hunt and kangaroo court doesn’t fill me with horror. If Parliament is offended then doubtless it will impose some sanction but it really isn’t doing itself any favours.

Does being close friends with BJ excuse it?

MayBee70

Isn’t it because of people like them that the Privileges Committee have had to be protected?

What from disagreeing with the proceedi gs. You really want a Parliament shut up because someone said something harman didn't like. A lot of what they have pointed out is true,prejudge g for a start.

choughdancer don’t your close friends tend to support you? It’s human nature ?

https://signal-corridor.live/uploads/talk/202306/medium-869925-img-1311.jpeg%3C/span%3E https://signal-corridor.live/uploads/talk/202306/medium-987088-img-1312.png%3C/span%3E

Zak Goldsmith has run away rather than face criticism by his peers

Siope

Could you provide a clip of that please, Freya? I am not sure when he did this? It wasn’t, of course, in the debate on the Committee’s recommendations, when his only intervention was this

news.sky.com/video/i-think-thats-a-mic-drop-jacob-rees-mogg-is-heard-during-debate-on-boris-johnson-partygate-report-12905589

Sorry not sure how to do the link. On you tube
Look for Sir Jacob Rees Mogg speaks on Privileges Commitee.