MPs rally to Hemming’s cause over “intimidating” solicitor’s letter

LDV reported on Wednesday that Lib Dem MP for birmingham Yardley John Hemming had been granted an emergency Commons motion to debate what he termed an “intimidating” email received from a firm of solicitors Withers LLP.

A brief update, courtesy of the BBC report:

MPs have rallied round one of their number who said he was being “intimidated” and prevented from exercising his right to freedom of speech in the Commons by a firm of solicitors.

On 14 January 2010, they backed a request from Liberal Democrat John Hemming to refer the matter to Committee on Standards and Privileges, who will now investigate. A motion debated by MPs “called attention” to Mr Hemming’s complaint that Withers LLP had “committed a contempt of the House by seeking to intimidate a Member in his parliamentary conduct”.

Mr Hemming referred to an e-mail sent to him by Withers threatening legal action against him over allegations he made about a building development in his constituency. … Mr Hemming’s motion was backed by the government, as well as the Tory and Liberal Democrat front benches. MPs then referred the complaint to the committee without a vote.

Full report, together with a 10-minute video of the debate, can be found at the BBC Democracy Live site here.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in Parliament.

One Comment

  • Albert. M. Bankment 16th Jan '10 - 3:14pm

    Mr Hemming (and, indeed, everyone who values the independence of Parliament) should, in the regularly repeated words of ‘Private Eye’, refer the egregious Messrs Withers to the celebrated reply given in the case of Arkell v Pressdram (1971).

One Trackback

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Brandon Masih
    For those arguing for the age moving process, are you definitely content with the policy going *further* than NZ’s proposal and covering smokeless tobacco, wh...
  • Paul Barker
    I disagree with the 5 but I can see where they are coming from. What was the argument for abstention ?...
  • Tim Leunig
    Well done those five. The freedom to be addicted is no freedom....
  • Simon R
    Banning cigarettes outright is not going to push the (entire) trade underground. It will directly end much of the trade, while a small proportion of the trade w...
  • Steve Trevethan
    Might ideas, policies, promotions, publicity, researches etc that are likely to better inform our citizenry also be part of a successful campaign...