Inside Politics

PrivilegeWatch Update: Speaker was "duty bound to protect privileges of the House" in the absence of instruction to the contrary

by Kady O'Malley Posted: September 12, 2012 4:08 PM Last Updated: September 12, 2012 4:41 PM
 Hot off the parliamentary presses comes the first official statement from House of Commons Speaker Andrew Scheer  -- or, at least, his office --  on the brewing court battle sparked by Auditor General Michael Ferguson's move to disclose email correspondence with committee staff in response to a sweeping access to information request filed by NDP research earlier this year. 


The gist? According to the Speaker's office, Commons lawyers did indeed file a  "notice of application" -- not an injunction, the dispatch takes pains to emphasize --  over certain parliamentary documents that have always been considered to be covered by privilege in the past. 

As such, the speaker was "duty bound" to take action to protect those papers from disclosure, at least "until such time as the House itself instructs him otherwise." 

Here's the full text: 

 
      • On Friday, the House of Commons filed a notice of application (not an injunction) under section 44 of the Access to Information Act for a review of the Auditor General's decision to release material.
         
      • Documents related to parliamentary committees have been previously considered as part of the proceedings of the House of Commons and thus subject to parliamentary privilege.  It was for this reason that the notice was filed.

      • The Speaker is a servant of the House and the guardian of the privileges of the House, and therefore, he is duty bound to protect the privileges of the House until such time as the House itself instructs him otherwise.   

On a possibly related note, I've been unable to confirm whether the practice of refusing to authorize the release of committee-related documents on privilege grounds is, indeed, standard operating procedure on the Hill. 

According to a spokesperson for Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault, although it may have happened in the past, it's not exactly an everyday occurrence, although she acknowledged that the office doesn't have a readily searchable database of refusals by third parties. 

In any case, it sounds as though, in the absence of a Commons motion requesting that he withdraw the claim, the Speaker's hands are tied. We'll see what happens when the House of Commons resumes regular parliamentary business next week. 


Tags: andrew scheer, blackberry jungle, over to you grand inquest of the nation, privilegewatch