Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A serving MP may have taken out a super-injunction preventing details of their activities being exposed, it was disclosed yesterday. The revelation came in the Commons as MPs discussed future parliamentary business – including whether to debate creeping judge-made privacy laws and the use of gagging orders.
Each Thursday, MPs are allowed to press the Leader of the House, Sir George Young, to allocate government time for debates. The Conservative MP for Hendon, Matthew Offord, used yesterday's session to raise the issue of gagging orders.
He said: "There has been much public discussion on the increasing use of super-injunctions and the ability of judges to decide policy instead of elected parliamentarians.
"Is the Leader of the House aware of the anomaly this creates if, as has been rumoured, a member of this place seeks a super-injunction to prevent discussion of their activities?"
He urged the Government to set aside time for a Commons debate.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments