Proceedings against Members

15.38In modern practice, most privilege complaints against Members of the Commons are proceeded with on motions made on consideration of or following reports from the Committee on Standards, or such other committee as may have been appointed in the circumstances of the case.1 The usual procedure in cases arising from such reports of the Committee on Standards is described in Chapter 5 (para 5.26 ).

In recent years, it has been common practice for a Member to make a personal statement very shortly after publication of the Committee report, before the motion has been tabled.2 The Member complained of is sometimes heard before the motion founded on the report is made,3 and otherwise after the motion has been made, which has been done formally.4 Though the older practice of the House was to require the withdrawal of the Member under criticism as soon as they had been heard, the practice was not invariable and the House exercises its discretion according to the circumstances.5 When the House resolved that a contempt had been committed by an unspecified group of Ministers on grounds of the Government's failure to comply with an earlier order of the House, the Government undertook to comply with the order and no further action was taken.6

When a Member has made an acceptable apology for the offence, the critical motion has sometimes been withdrawn.7 In two instances, the House condemned the Member's conduct as a breach of its privileges, but resolved that in consequence of the full and ample apology they had offered to the House, or that having regard to their withdrawal of the expressions complained of, it would not proceed any further in the matter.8

A Member having withdrawn but not yet been adjudged guilty of contempt may return to their place when debate on their conduct has been adjourned,9 but it is otherwise if they have been adjudged guilty, even though debate on the question of the punishment to be inflicted on them has been adjourned.10

For actions taken in respect of disclosures of proceedings in secret session, see Erskine May (24th edn, 2011), p 280.

Footnotes

  1. 1. For the procedure when a privilege complaint against a Member is made directly in the House, see Erskine May (21st edn, 1989), pp 138–39; and cf the case of a Member who was suspended from the service of the House for damage to the Mace, CJ (1987–88) 463. In analogous circumstances in the past, the House ordered the attendance of Members who were complained of but who were not thought likely to attend. Members who have been ordered to attend but failed to do so, the order having been duly served, have been ordered into the custody of the Serjeant or even expelled (ibid (1667–87) 85). More frequently, the House has ordered their presence on another day (ibid (1697–99) 643, 645). If the Serjeant has been unable to serve the order on the Member (ibid (1782–84) 739; ibid (1810) 295 and cf ibid (1813–14) 427) or the Member has indicated in writing that they are unable to attend through indisposition (ibid (1697–99) 661; ibid (1770–72) 279, and cf ibid (1761–64) 709), the House has fixed another day for the proceedings. Where a Member ordered to attend to answer a charge absconded, the House proceeded with its investigation (ibid (1727–32) 810, 876; ibid (1761–64) 722).
  2. 2. See HC Deb (12 May 2011) 527, c 1384; ibid (3 April 2014) 578, c 1033; ibid (19 July 2018) 645, c 589.
  3. 3. HC Deb (1989–90) 168, c 889 (when the Member spoke after the motion that the report be now considered had been agreed to); ibid (1998–99) 335, cc 23, 26; ibid (2001–02) 373, cc 884–85.
  4. 4. HC Deb (1994–95) 258, c 350; ibid (1999–2000) 345, c 428; ibid (2001–02) 380, c 213; ibid (1987–88) 131, c 934, where a Member who was suspended for damaging the Mace spoke during the course of the debate on the motion for the suspension; and ibid (23 July 2007) 463, c 627, where a Member, the subject of a report from the Committee on Standards and Privileges, was named by the Speaker for wilfully disregarding the authority of the Chair.
  5. 5. See CJ (1883) 280 and Parl Deb (1883) 280, c 812; CJ (1887) 389 and Parl Deb (1887) 317, cc 1633–38; and CJ (1941–42) 129. Members who withdrew have been readmitted to make a further explanation: see CJ (1790) 516; ibid (1893–94) 631; ibid (1911) 37 and HC Deb (1911) 21, c 1553; and cf also CJ (1547–1628) 862. In some instances, Members have remained in the Chamber, ibid (1976–77) 448; and cf HC Deb (1983–84) 62, c 159 ff. Two Members whose conduct was under criticism in a motion both withdrew after making a short statement (ibid (1994–95) 258, c 351); in recent times, Members have made personal statements on the day the Committee's report was published or as soon as possible thereafter, in advance of the debate on the Committee report; see ibid (19 July 2018) 645, c 589.
  6. 6. Votes and Proceedings, 4 December 2018; HC Deb (4 December 2018) 650, c 732.
  7. 7. CJ (1873) 61; ibid (1875) 46; ibid (1887) 377; ibid (1911) 36–37; ibid (1921) 393; ibid (1928–29) 159; ibid (1935–36) 203.
  8. 8. CJ (1845) 589; ibid (1880) 54. In one case, after the Commons had resolved that a Member (who had in writing reflected on the Speaker's conduct in the Chair) was guilty of a contempt, the Speaker suggested that they be recalled to afford them an opportunity, which they took, of apologising to the House (ibid (1893–94) 417); in another, a Member found in contempt apologised to the House and no further proceedings were taken (CJ (1950–51) 298–99, 301).
  9. 9. Parl Deb (1877) 235, cc 1815, 1833.
  10. 10. Parl Deb (1846) 85, c 1198 and cf Parl Deb (1845) 85, c 1291.