Select Committee on European Scrutiny First Report


Disclosure of Committee's internal working papers



1.  An article which appeared in the Daily Telegraph on Tuesday 26 June drew heavily on briefing which had been produced for the Committee by its legal adviser. Describing the legal adviser's briefing as "a confidential legal analysis", the article, which identified the adviser by name, quoted his briefing on the draft mandate for an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) on a reform treaty, which was to be discussed at the European Council 21-22 June. The legal adviser had prepared two briefing notes for the Committee: the first on 20 June prior to the European Council, and the second on 25 June following the Council's conclusion. The newspaper article contained direct quotations from both notes. The legal adviser's advice was subsequently referred to in the House during questions to the Foreign Secretary on 3 July by Mr Graham Brady [1].

2.  The legal adviser's briefing was an internal working paper of the Committee. Its disclosure has had a serious impact on our work. First, it has the potential to undermine the ability of its officials to give forthright advice without fear of that advice being used for political ends. Secondly, because of the leak, the Committee did not proceed with an item on its agenda, namely to produce a report on the mandate which the IGC has been invited to adopt by the European Council. The leak has therefore had the effect of denying the House the opinion of one of its committees.

3.  In accordance with the procedures laid down in Erskine May[2] we sought to discover the source of the leak by formally asking all Members and staff if they could explain how the leak came about[3]. This investigation has not shed light on how the leak occurred. We then invited the Liaison Committee to give its views. The Liaison Committee concurred with our own assessment that the leak had amounted to substantial interference in the work of the Committee.

4.  The Committee takes a serious view of this matter, and therefore concludes that this Special Report should be considered and reported on by the Committee on Standards and Privileges.


1   3 July, Official Report, col.804 Back

2   Parliamentary Practice, Erskine May 23rd edition ed. Sir William McKay, pp. 776-7. Back

3   The responses are printed as an Appendix to the Report. Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2007
Prepared 24 July 2007