4 -
The element of the Bill that is somewhat
different from the classic traditions of parliamentary law is that instead of this Council claiming power to punish for breaches of privilege, that question is to
be handed over to the Courts. In other words the Bill
makes the concession, and rightly So, that this Council should never act as judge in its own cause.
I do not propose to speak separately on all the points and amendments which have been put forward by Members today. Their proposals have been made after serious and prolonged deliberation and consultation and they will therefore be contained in
an amended text of the full Bill which will be
published in the gazette at the end of this week for general information.
Nevertheless although I am not going to speak about all the proposals I should like add something to what Members have already said with regard
regard to some
clauses within the Bill.
Many of the concerns about the Bill,
particularly those of the Press have focussed on clause 20 which deals with defamatory and unauthorised
publications. The Clause represents an attempt to impose limits on
limits on the exercise of the right to subject
members
the Council, its
the exercise
members or proceedings to scurilous abuse or malicious attacks or to disclose in a public way what has been done and discussed in confidence.
In the context of accepted parliamentary law, it is a breach of the privilege of a legislature to
subject it or its proceedings to contempt. That protection is necessary for the functioning of any body of the nature of this Council. If, that is not
agreed, then the argument becomes one that says bluntly that there is no limit to what might be said.