Skip to main content

The Swan and Freedom of Speech

The link is to the report of the Standards and Privileges Committee of today's date which finds Withers are indeed guilty of contempt of parliament.

Hopefully the development at The Swan will now progress.

Quoting from the conclusion:
26. The evidence in this case is very clear and in our view the conclusion is no less clear. We conclude that Withers LLP were in contempt of the House when on 4 August 2009 they threatened Mr Hemming with legal proceedings in respect of statements he had made outside the House concerning their client's behaviour, were he to repeat those statements in the House. The contempt was repeated and compounded on subsequent dates, notably on 11 August. An opportunity in October to withdraw was not taken by Withers LLP; and the contempt was denied by them even once the matter had been placed before the House. We are surprised that a firm of the standing of Withers LLP should have taken so long to understand the scope of Parliamentary privilege. It was only when they sought advice from Counsel that Withers LLP accepted they had erred and they apologised unreservedly to the House and to Mr Hemming.

27. It has long been accepted that the House should assert its privileges sparingly. In the light of the apology the House has received, we make no recommendation for further action on the matter referred to us.


My statement is:
It is the job of MPs to speak up for their constituents. Our Libel Laws now prevent people from telling the truth about people who have expensive lawyers. Parliament today has stood up for freedom of speech. We also need to change the law on libel costs so that people do not face ruinous legal costs for telling the truth.

The people who have been suffering from the legal row over the Swan are the residents of Yardley. To me they are the people who come first.

Comments

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…