Ruling
June 4, 1975
Reflections upon a Member
Hon. James Jerome
Speaker of the House
Ruling Text
The strict definition of parliamentary privilege should not be expanded to include controversies as to facts, opinions or conclusions. These are matters for debate; they are not questions of privilege.
If a Member complaining about the acts or remarks of another Member does not put his complaint in the form of a specific charge, it should not be considered as a question of privilege. The Speaker, quoting an earlier ruling, said: "[S]imple justice requires that no hon. Member should have to submit to investigation of his conduct by the House or a committee until he has been charged with an offence".
Edit Metadata
Holding
"Disputes over facts or opinions are matters for debate, not questions of privilege, and a complaint against a Member must be framed as a specific charge to be considered as such."
AI Summary
This ruling establishes that disagreements over facts are matters for debate, not privilege, and that a specific charge is required to raise a question of privilege against a Member.
AI Analysis
- Outcome
- Other
- Tone
- Educational
- Procedural Stage
- Not specified
- Significance
Low
High