Skip to main content

Freedom of Speech, Privilege and Expenses

There is a lot of confusion in the media about the attempt by those being prosecuted for Fraud to claim that the expeneses regime falls within Article IX of the Bill of Rights.

It is important that MPs are allowed to speak freely in the Houses of Parliament about issues. What you do not want is people being tied up in legal proceedings and unable to speak the truth about the problems faced by their constituents.

I have provided considerable information to the Standards and Privileges committee in part based upon work done by an Irish Barrister Kieron Wood. This submission is privileged and as such I cannot publish it at the moment. It will, however, be published later.

Whether something falls within the ambit of Article IX of the Bill of Rights is determined both by the courts and also by parliament. This is the principle of comity.

It is quite clear that this does not include the salary and expenses of a Member of Parliament. If it did, then there would be no tax. Furthermore legislation has made specific reference to the second home expenses of MPs. That indicates that parliament has legislated to ensure that the treatment of MPs expenses and salary is the same as for any other role.

The Labour Party's solicitors may intend to try this out as a defence, but it can easily be knocked out by the CPS. There is a mass of precedent that justifies this as well as various statutes in place.

The underlying test for contempt of parliament is whether something outside parliament has the effect of preventing parliament doing its job. I cannot see anyone arguing the ludicrous case that it is necessary for MPs to fiddle expenses so that they can do their job.

Comments

Jerry said…
John, been pondering this whole matter as David Chaytor was my MP.

Any Person in the EU who is charged with a criminal offence will be entitled to Legal advice and representation at the expense of the public purse.

Would this still enable the 3 MP's and 1 Peer to claim for legal aid as I believe its there right to do this.

If this is the case and the Lawyers for the Labour party and Cons, would they screw the already over stretched legal aid system.

I can see these 4 trials costing millions of punds in any case.

Would the prosecution of the already disgraced MP's be of any benefit to the UK Tax Payer, I cannot see that it would, it is not just finding the MPs guilty, there still is the hidden costs the Tax payer would face, like the Probation service, CPs and any other testement that would be required. I think its all first offences for the MP's as such,checks and balances would be made.

what ever happens in Westminister Mags in the next few weeks will obviously be adjourned and sent to A higher court for determination.

This will take weeks of planning, all the while costing millions in over charged lawyers fees.

Just confused John, as you know, I know the courts all too well, I am just looking at this from my point of view, and think deep down I cannot see any benefit of charging let alone expecting these MP's to go to Jail. Yes they got their hands caught in the Till and they must face the punishment but look at the way I see it.

A benefit Cheat might just get a fine, ordered to pay the money back, rarely do they go to Jail, I cannot see any difference with that to what the MP's have done. The Tax payer and the Voter was still Screwed.

I am not defending the Mp's, far from it, Just thinking Logical.

Popular posts from this blog

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

The Labour Candidate's Book Promotion Tour and Why It Matters

In the 2015 General Election the Labour Candidate criticised John Hemming for having an external interest and made a pledge that she would be a "Full Time MP for Yardley and my only other job will be mom & carer ...".  Here is a copy of that pledge:


Since that point she has been working on paid Television Programmes and has also written a book. John Hemming has made no secret of the fact that he chairs the board of the company he founded in 1983. This involves one meeting a month. When he was the MP for Yardley he was a full time MP and the Job of being MP for Yardley came first. The Labour candidate has reported 1,274 hours of work other than being an MP in the two years she has been elected and her income in the last year was over £131,000.

Ignoring the question as to how she reconciles that with her "pledge" the question is raised as to what extent her external activity conflicts with the role of Member of Parliament for Yardley. She is supposed to de…