mcd

Using parliamentary privilege in relation to a man complaining about his use of parliamentary privilege is really rubbing it in.


The solicitor who said that a Labour MP should be dragged through the streets and lynched if his allegations about a Tory Mayor proved baseless has apologised after being named in parliament.

Andrew Lindsay made the inflammatory suggestion about hanging Andy McDonald, the MP for Middlesbrough, in a LinkedIn post.

The politician had previously used parliamentary privilege to criticises Ben Houchen, a Conservative Mayor, for his role in the Teesside Freeport development, which has become mired in allegations of corruption and is now being investigated.

But outside of parliament McDonald stopped short of repeating his claims, which prompted Houchen to call him a “liar and a coward”.

Lindsay, the chairman of the legal advisory service Representation UK and the former head of corporate finance at Yorkshire firm Lupton Fawcett, defended Houchen on LinkedIn, stating that the mayor “has done more for Teesside than any politician. Ever”. 

The lawyer continued, “If it turns out the enquiry concludes ‘there’s nothing to be seen here,’ and in the meantime some investment and jobs are lost, local Labour MP, Andy McDonald, (who has refused to repeat his allegations outside of Parliament) should be dragged through the streets of Teesside and lynched”.

Lindsay told ROF last week, “I don’t think anyone who read my comment could seriously think that it should be taken literally!”

“It was clearly a metaphor to make the point that Parliamentary privilege is precisely that - namely a ‘privilege,’ which should not be used - (as Andy McDonald appears to have done) as a method of making statements with complete impunity, which might be completely inaccurate and potentially actionable”, he said. 

“If the MP seriously thought that some grave misdemeanour had been perpetrated, he should have been prepared to make it publicly”, said Lindsay.

McDonald told RollOnFriday he had reported the matter to the police. “By all means disagree with me, but threatening to hang me is beyond the pale”, he said.

The spat reached parliament this week when McDonald read out Lindsay’s post and told the House it “has deeply upset and alarmed my family and me”.

The MP said that, "Given the murders in recent years of Jo Cox, Sir David Amess and Nigel Jones’s personal aide, Andrew Pennington”, he sought the Speaker's guidance on "what can be done to ensure that the legitimate debate on such matters of significance to our constituents does not spill over in such a manner that makes the appalling comments by the likes of Mr Lindsay increasingly more likely".

He also asked what could be done to protect MPs "on the receiving end of such abuse, and reduce the likelihood of these dreadful outbursts”.

Lindsay Hoyle replied that “people are entitled to make their views known inside and outside this House, but threats to members are very real and those who comment should consider the potential effects of their words before posting injudiciously, rather than afterwards".

After ROF’s story was published, McDonald texted Hoyle on Friday. The speaker said he “took it very, very seriously”, and had gone so far as to raise “security issues” with the relevant authorities.

McDonald told parliament he was grateful for Hoyle's support and his “condemnation of the abhorrent remarks made about me on social media by a corporate lawyer, who should know better”, but sadly failed to get ROF into Hansard.

In the wake of that public lashing, Lindsay “unreservedly & unequivocally apologised” and had made a donation to the Jo Cox Foundation, said McDonald, . “That’s much to his credit and I thank him”, he added.


lawyerupKnow who wants you. LawyerUp lets top firms ping your app when they like you for a role. Grab it on the App Store and Google Play.

Survey
Thank you for taking part in RollOnFriday's survey of in-house lawyers. We use the results to write stories and reports. We don't take your name and so the answers you provide will be kept anonymous.
Your role
Your sector
When you're picking a firm, what's the most important factor?
How do you think the size of your in-house team will change over the next two years?
Will this be at the expense of instructing private practice?
How happy are you with your external lawyers working from home?
Tip Off ROF

Comments

Anonymous 14 July 23 09:45

And just in time!

The Hull gallows were three quarters built by the time he got his apology in.

A few moments later and we'd have been back to the Middle Ages no doubt.

Anonymous Anonymous 14 July 23 12:30

The solicitor has apologised after being named in parliament. Too late. Damage done. Another example of giving the legal profession a bad name.

Teesside 14 July 23 13:03

More revelations in Private Eye this week. 

Something seems very wrong in Tees Valley where it appears the the safeguards around public money have been systematically removed.

So with Teesworks the taxpayer forked out £260m and underwrote a £107m loan. However without any transparency at the time, 90% of the shares suddenly were given to two private developers. So taxpayers pay, but private developers enjoy almost all of the returns.

 

Related News