Committee
Justice 2 Committee, 18 Mar 2003
18 Mar 2003 · S1 · Justice 2 Committee
Item of business
Petitions
Judiciary (Freemasons) (PE306)
Petition PE306 is on freemasonry and the judiciary. The committee decided that it did not want to take further action, but invited the petitioner to provide more information, which has now been provided. What is the committee's view on whether the petition should be referred back to the Public Petitions Committee?
In the same item of business
The Convener:
Lab
Petition PE306 is on freemasonry and the judiciary. The committee decided that it did not want to take further action, but invited the petitioner to provide ...
Mr Hamilton:
SNP
I am content that the issue has been exhausted.
Bill Aitken:
Con
I concur.
The Convener:
Lab
Unless any other member is otherwise minded, I do not propose to refer the petition back to the Public Petitions Committee.There is one question that I need ...
Stewart Stevenson:
SNP
On whose shoulders would the liability lie in law if we were to publish the evidence in its entirety?
Gillian Baxendine:
My understanding is that a number of issues arise, one of which is possible defamation. The Parliament is protected in relation to that. Nevertheless, it wou...
Stewart Stevenson:
SNP
I therefore propose that, based on the legal opinion, the evidence be edited or those parts that relate to potential breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 b...
Gillian Baxendine:
To be clear, my understanding is that if the evidence is published as a parliamentary proceeding, the protection extends to the petitioner as well.
Stewart Stevenson:
SNP
In that case, I recommend non-publication.
Mr Hamilton:
SNP
We have to be careful about this. My take on it is that to publish half the paper would be to stoke the fire still further. I suspect that we should simply s...
The Convener:
Lab
I am sympathetic to the principle of the petition, but the committee decided that it was not, and that is the status of the petition at the moment. We invite...
Mr Hamilton:
SNP
The point is that if we make an active choice to extend parliamentary privilege to something that we are sceptical about, we do a disservice.
The Convener:
Lab
So the committee is agreed that we will not publish the evidence.In closing our last meeting, I wish to put on record my thanks to all members of the committ...
Stewart Stevenson:
SNP
Hear, hear.
The Convener:
Lab
They have managed to do the impossible sometimes in deciphering all the decisions that we have made. I thank them very much. Perhaps when the meeting closes ...
Bill Aitken:
Con
Before we close the meeting, it would be appropriate to associate myself with your comments. This has been a tremendously good committee. We have frequently ...
The Convener:
Lab
Thank you.
Stewart Stevenson:
SNP
I would like to reflect on what has been said by my two colleagues and political rivals, and agree with them that the committee has worked well. I have thoro...
The Convener:
Lab
It is amazing the things that we have learned about one another, and the things that I have learned about you, Stewart, and all the jobs that you have had. S...
Bill Aitken:
Con
I was always just worried that he had a problem holding down a steady job.
The Convener:
Lab
I also thank the official report. I cannot imagine what it must be like keeping up with what members say. Thank you.
Meeting closed at 12:31.