REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
| Date | 01 October 1947 |
| Published date | 01 October 1947 |
| Author | O. Hood Phillips |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1947.tb00063.x |
REIWRTS
OF
COMMITTEES
PARLIAMENTARY
PRIVILEGE:
THE
CASE
OF
MR.
W.
J.
BROWN
THE validity
of
an agreement restricting
a
Member’s freedom
of
action in Parliament has never before been submitted to the
judgment
of
the Committee of Privileges. The nearest prece-
dent to the case
of
Mr.
W.
J.
Brown, the Member for Rugby,
is the case of Alderman Robinson
(H.
C.
85, 1943-44,
p.
5),
which is not very similar.
Mr. Brown was the salaried Parliamentary General Secre-
tary of the Civil Service Clerical Association, a trade union
within the meaning of the Trade Union Act,
1913.
There was
a written contract between
Mr.
Brown and the Association,
which included provisions that
Mr.
Brown should
‘
be entitled
to engage in his political activities with complete freedom
’,
that he should
‘
deal with all questions arising in the work of
the Association which requires parliamentary or political
action
’,
but that nothing therein contained should entitle him
‘
in his political and parliamentary activities to purport to
represent the political views
of
the Association (if any)
’,
and
that he should
‘
only represent the Association in
so
far as
Civil Service questions are concerned
’.
Mr. Brown was entitled
to
terminate the agreement by six months’ notice, but there
was
no corresponding power on the part
of
the Association.
His
expressions
of
his political opinions became embarrassing
to the Association, and for that reason the Executive Commit-
tee
desired to terminate the agreement. They attempted by
correspondence and meetings to agree with Mr. Brown the terms
on which his official connection with the Association might be
brought to an end without financial loss to himself. Mr. Brown
in fact provisionally agreed financial terms which he said were
not unreasonable, but he insisted that the question of the
termination
of
the agreement should be submitted to the
Annual Conference.
At
this point complaint was made to the
Committee
of
Privileges that the conduct
of
the Executive
Committee of the Association was calculated improperly to
influence Mr. Brown in the exercise of his parliamentary duties
and constituted a breach of privilege.
The Committee of Privileges
(1947,
H.
C.
Pap.
118)
formu-
lated the following description
of
the nature of the privilege
420
To continue reading
Request your trial