My Lords, I am not saying that he is prevented: he can say that he has been removed because they do not like his face. The question is whether the statement is made within the scope of the Act and therefore whether it is one for which he will receive qualified privilege. If he rambles on about the chairman’s drinking habits or something, he is not forbidden from doing so, but it is hardly a statement within the scope of the Act. What is important is that he is allowed to make the statement that he needs to make, and to ensure that it is properly protected from defamation proceedings.
Company Law Reform Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Viscount Bledisloe
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 16 May 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
682 c147 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 19:54:12 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322144
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322144
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322144