Search

This report does not look into specific allegations of hacking, some of which are currently under investigation by the prosecuting authorities or may become the subject of judicial review. Instead it considers whether hacking of MPs' mobile phones, if it has occurred, may be a contempt of Parliament. The committee has concluded that there could potentially be a contempt if the hacking can be shown to have interfered with the work of the House or to have impeded or obstructed an MP from taking part in such work, or where a series of acts of hacking can be shown that the hacking has interfered with the work of the House by creating a climate of insecurity for one or more MPs. It is proposed that the draft Privileges Bill should include a definition of what is meant by 'contempt of Parliament' and that the Bill should codify Parliament's powers to impose sanctions, including a power for the House of Commons to fine. The committee points out that hacking is an offence under the criminal law and that civil law remedies may be available to MPs, just as they are available to others. It suggests that MPs and the House should pursue legal remedies in preference to proceeding against hackers and that only in exceptional circumstances should a hacker who has been brought before a court of law be proceeded against subsequently for contempt. In the view of the committee, there should be no special provision made to provide MPs or Parliament with remedies through the courts that are not available to others

The House should be given the opportunity to restate its acceptance of the principle behind the proposal that lay members be added to the Committee on Standards and Privileges, the Procedure Committee concludes in a report published today. The committee's report responds to the resolution of the House of 2 December last year that lay members should sit on the Committee on Standards and Privileges. If that principle is restated, the House should study with care the arguments made for the inclusion of lay members with or without voting rights, and decide whether lay members should be appointed to the committee with full voting rights or whether they should be appointed with more limited rights protected by rules on quorum and publication of their opinion or advice. A decision in favour of membership with full voting rights would require legislation to be brought forward to put beyond reasonable doubt any question of whether parliamentary privilege applies to the Committee on Standards where it has an element of lay membership. The Procedure Committee recommends that the Committee on Standards and Privileges should be split in two, and that lay members should be included only on the committee relating to standards. The committee also makes a number of practical recommendations about the number, appointment and term of office of lay members.

The public will be given the right to recall their local MP if they are found to have engaged in serious wrongdoing under proposals announced in "Recall of MPs Draft Bill " ( ISBN 9780101824125, Cm.8241) published today. The proposals fulfil a commitment made in the Programme for Government as part of the political reform agenda. In the draft Bill, the Government is proposing to introduce a power of recall, allowing voters to force a by-election having had a petition signed by 10% of his or her constituents. At the last general election the manifestos of all three of the main parties included a commitment to establish a recall mechanism. The draft Bill is being published for pre-legislative scrutiny and sets out two triggers for a recall petition: firstly where an MP is convicted in the UK of an offence and receives a custodial sentence of 12 months or less, and secondly where the House of Commons resolves, through a vote by MPs, that a recall petition should be opened. The first trigger will close a gap in the existing legislation whereby MPs are only disqualified if they receive a custodial sentence of more than 12 months. The second trigger is an additional disciplinary power for the House of Commons, which for the first time allows constituents to have their say in deciding whether their MP should stay in office. The petition will be administered by the local returning officer and will be open for a period of 8 weeks. If 10% of eligible constituents sign the petition, the MP's seat will be vacated and a by-election will be held.