I wish I could say I was surprised. Sadly I cannot.
I have never known of another workplace where grown adults could act like children and still be able to keep their jobs. Only on the hill.
We have the most expensive day care in the country- The use of Parliamentary Privilege was earned centuries ago- Now it is completely abused- The Speaker has the power and the right to stop this abuse. Why does he not take action.
Parliamentary privilege - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Parliamentary privilege (also absolute privilege) is a legal immunity enjoyed by members of certain legislatures, in which legislators are granted protection against civil or criminal liability for actions done or statements made related to one's duties as a legislator. It is common in countries whose constitutions are based on the Westminster system. A similar mechanism is known as parliamentary immunity.
In the United Kingdom, it allows members of the House of Lords and House of Commons to speak freely during ordinary parliamentary proceedings without fear of legal action on the grounds of slander, contempt of court or breaching the Official Secrets Act.[1][2] It also means that members of Parliament cannot be arrested on civil matters for statements made or acts undertaken as an MP within the grounds of the Palace of Westminster, on the condition that such statements or acts occur as part of a proceeding in Parliament—for example, as a question to the Prime Minister in the House of Commons. This allows Members to raise questions or debate issues which could slander an individual, interfere with an ongoing court case or threaten to reveal state secrets, such as in the Zircon affair or several cases involving the Labour MP Tam Dalyell.
There is no immunity from arrest on criminal grounds, nor does the civil privilege entirely extend to the devolved administrations in Scotland or Wales.[3] A consequence of the privilege of free speech is that legislators in Westminster systems are forbidden by conventions of their House from uttering certain words, or implying that another member is lying.[4] (See unparliamentary language.)
The rights and privileges of members are overseen by the powerful Committee on Standards and Privileges. If a member of the House is in breach of the rules then he/she can be suspended or even expelled from the House. Such past breaches have included giving false evidence before a committee of the House and the taking of bribes by members.
Similar rights apply in other Westminster system countries such as Canada and Australia. In the United States, the Speech or Debate Clause in Article One of the United States Constitution provides for parliamentary privilege based on Westminster, and many state constitutions provide similar clauses for their state legislatures.
Parliamentary privilege is controversial because of its potential for abuse; a member can use privilege to make damaging allegations that would ordinarily be discouraged by defamation laws, without first determining whether those allegations have a strong foundation. A member could, even more seriously, undermine national security and/or the safety of an ongoing military or covert operation or undermine relations with a foreign state by releasing information that the Government does not wish to be in the public domain.
Parliamentary Privilege - General Article - Compendium of Procedure Home - House of Commons . Canada
ndividual and Collective Rights Related to Parliamentary Privilege
Rights that are protected by privilege are those that are necessary in order to allow Members of the House of Commons to perform their parliamentary functions. These rights are enjoyed both by individual Members of Parliament-because the House cannot perform its functions without its Members-and by the House, as a whole, for the protection of its Members as well as its own authority and dignity.
The rights and immunities related to Members individually may be grouped under the following headings:
freedom of speech;
freedom from arrest in civil actions;
exemption from jury duty; and
exemption from being subpoenaed to attend court.
The two most important collective privileges or powers of the House of Commons are its disciplinary powers and its exclusive right to regulate its own internal affairs.
Limitations of Privilege - Detailed Article - Compendium of Procedure - House of Commons ? Canada
Limitations of Privilege
Limitations on Freedom of Speech
The extent of the parliamentary privilege of freedom of speech is unclear. There is no doubt that statements made in the Chamber and in committees, and subsequently published under the authority of the House in Hansard or in a committee's evidence, are privileged. However, it is not at all certain that parliamentary privilege applies to versions of such statements published elsewhere, or to notes, letters, and communications by telephone and other electronic means. Statements made to the press are not privileged and even verbatim repetition or reproduction by the Member of statements made in the House can expose the Member and the publisher of the statement to allegations of slander or libel. The courts have determined that an accurate and fair reproduction of proceedings themselves by the press enjoys the same privilege as the House and its Members.
The publication of libellous material has been considered by most courts to be beyond the privileges of Parliament in cases where the publication was not part of the parliamentary process. Courts have traditionally taken the approach of relating any situation in which a Member may become involved back to the original intent of parliament privilege, which was to protect the right of Members of Parliament to freely debate in Parliament. Thus, even correspondence between one Member and another on a matter of public policy might not be considered to be privileged.
The House is, by tradition, intolerant of any apparent misuse by its Members of the privilege of freedom of speech. It is a powerful immunity and Speakers have dealt decisively with Members who have appeared to be taking advantage of this privilege. Speakers have often cautioned Members that in expressing their opinions, they should not unfairly or needlessly attack the reputation of citizens or groups.
Members are also expected to refrain from discussion of matters that are sub judice (under consideration by the courts). It is accepted practice that restrictions should be placed on references by Members in the course of debate to matters awaiting judicial decision and that such matters should not be the subject of motions or questions in the House of Commons.
The rules that the House institutes and the conventions that it observes in the regulation of its own affairs also impose certain limits on the freedom of speech of its Members. Numerous terms and expressions, for example, have been recognized by Speakers as "unparliamentary"; any Member using these terms and expressions risks censure, and other disciplinary measures.
Privilege and the Law
Members of Parliament are not above the law. The right to freedom from interference in the discharge of parliamentary duties does not apply to actions taken by Members outside parliamentary proceedings which could lead to criminal charges. No Member may claim immunity from arrest or imprisonment on such charges.
It is generally accepted that Members can be arrested on criminal charges even within the parliamentary precinct. However, outside police forces must first obtain permission from the Speaker before entering the parliamentary precinct in order to conduct an interrogation or to execute a warrant.
Any search authorized by warrant must be carried out in the presence of a representative of the Speaker, who also ensures that any Member who is the subject of the warrant receives a copy. The Speaker must also be notified whenever a Member will be unable to attend the sittings of a House because of his or her detention or conviction on criminal charges. The person accompanying the peace officer must insure that no documents or papers covered by parliamentary privilege are seized under the warrant.
The House of Commons enjoys the right to control its own precinct (buildings and grounds); this control applies to security and policing activities inside buildings located within the precinct. The Sergeant-at-Arms is responsible for oversight of these activities under the direction of the Speaker. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) work outside the parliamentary precinct buildings to ensure security of the exterior and to insure that Members and other persons having business within the precinct have unimpeded access to them.
The Speaker must always ensure that the privileges of the House and its Members are respected, while at the same time avoiding allegations that Parliament is obstructing justice. As is the case in all matters of privilege, when the Speaker decides that a prima facie case of privilege exists, the final decision in the matter is taken by the House itself.
Related Article
