Contempt of Parliament

So what?

Will they suffer any meaningful sanction for it?

Do electors even care?

Curious as to what counts as contempt. Witch-hunt and kangaroo court.
Lord Cruddas is quoted “If they don’t want people noticing they are a kangaroo court, then they should hop less.”
Bit tame really?
Playground spate.

ronib

Curious as to what counts as contempt. Witch-hunt and kangaroo court.
Lord Cruddas is quoted “If they don’t want people noticing they are a kangaroo court, then they should hop less.”
Bit tame really?
Playground spate.

Up pops ronib to prove my point...

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

MayBee70 I think we’re well down the rabbit hole if the Privileges Committee can’t handle some criticism.

As our representatives MPs should behave with dignity and uphold behavioural standards in the house. I don’t care who they are, if they don’t do that they aren’t fit to be MPs.

But things like that ( and the sort of newspaper headlines aimed at people eg the enemies of the people one) do lead to people being threatened. Our government and parliament are based on rules of common decency. Out of interest do you think the Privileges Committee was a kangaroo court?

MayBee70 no I don’t think kangaroos were involved and it was a necessary, if flawed procedure .
Having watched Putin address the Russian nation I think it’s important that if someone has an opinion then it should be aired. We need an open and free society and not one dictated to from above.

ronib

MayBee70 no I don’t think kangaroos were involved and it was a necessary, if flawed procedure .
Having watched Putin address the Russian nation I think it’s important that if someone has an opinion then it should be aired. We need an open and free society and not one dictated to from above.

You don’t appear to understand the procedures and rules relating to the committees.

ronib

MayBee70 no I don’t think kangaroos were involved and it was a necessary, if flawed procedure .
Having watched Putin address the Russian nation I think it’s important that if someone has an opinion then it should be aired. We need an open and free society and not one dictated to from above.

This is about personal probity ronib. Are you saying you think it’s okay for MPs to do just as they like in the house, including slandering other people, calling the work of their own committees wrong if they disagree with the outcome, putting their feet up on benches, etc.etc. Come on now, we are better than that.

^ Come on now, we are better than that.^

I don't think we are, Casdon. I think the electorate in general doesn't give a monkey's and can't understand what the fuss is about. ronib is just a representative of them.

How much interest does this sort of topic get on Gnet, for example?

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.

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.

MaizieD Not following your logic today…

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202306/medium-196171-img-1309.jpeg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202306/medium-861545-img-1308.jpeg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202306/medium-661290-img-1310.png

👀

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.

You haven’t read the report, have you? It deals with precisely this point very early on.

I seem to recall that you are fond of quoting Erskine May, so you may also be interested in the rules about contempt (from Erskine May) that the Privileges Committee use to determine contempt.

Siope Frankly the Privileges Committee was not prevented in any way from presenting its findings. End of story. A never ending work of fiction …..

… you remind me of the bloke who wrote a nice review about the shrimp gumbo in the middle of a thread about the book, but alas for him not the restaurant, Ulysses.

Faintly amusing, but irrelevant and rather embarrassing for him.

Criticism of the Privileges Committee's findings and procedures by MPs when they publish a report to the House is allowable because reports are debated by the House. But criticism of any kind and especially harassment, threats, etc., while the Committee is doing the work commissioned by the House is not acceptable and the Committee is right to call it out and name names. Some of the so-called criticism was despicable and the House should consider suspending the offender's. It's nonsense to cast this as a free speech issue. That is simply designed to obfuscate.

Siope the real embarrassment lies with the way the House of Commons chooses to conduct itself. Shameful.

inews.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-penny-mordaunt-pm-privileges-committee-security-concern-2406889

Some members of the Privileges Committee were given extra security as a result of threats. That is no small thing. The comments were not respectful or based on the evidence collected by the committee but simply fed the fury of the type of person who would be motivated to make those threats. How could anyone defend that?

ronib

Siope the real embarrassment lies with the way the House of Commons chooses to conduct itself. Shameful.

And how is 'the way the House of commons chooses to conduct itself' embarrassing?

I have to agree with Siope, I think.

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.

That doesn't explain it at all ronib.

We are talking about MPs being in contempt of Parliament because of comments they made about the Privileges Committee.

The security issue is a sperate issue.