Consider the following scenario:

In a recent report, the Committee of Privileges in the House of Commons proposed Parliament pass primary legislation to amend the scope of parliamentary privilege.

The Committee proposed the reforms because several Members of Parliament (MPs) have been making use of protections afforded by parliamentary privilege to (i) make statements breaching reporting injunctions and super-injunctions ordered by the courts, and (ii) to make potentially defamatory statements about certain members of the public. These statements were all made during debates in Parliament.

The proposed reforms will (i) make it unlawful for an MP to breach an injunction or super-injunction, and (ii) place MPs in the same position as ordinary members of the public in relation to defamation claims.

The Speaker of the House of Commons wishes to understand whether the proposals will adversely impact the working of Parliament. With this in mind, you have been asked to provide a critical analysis of parliamentary privilege, particularly in relation to:

Injunctions and super-injunctions, and the impact which breaches of such court orders may have on the relationship between the courts and Parliament.

Defamation.

In producing your paper, you are asked to make reference, as appropriate, to case law, legislation, constitutional principles, constitutional conventions, reports of parliamentary committees, government papers and any other relevant materials to support your analysis.