Let's look at why it is important to be very clear about why we get this right and why so much attention to detail is paramount (with the help of Chat GPT so I can't be accused of "misunderstanding" 🙄). In its current form the Duty of Candour will apply to over SIX MILLION public organisations, professionals, individuals. As a campaign group we have had many a conversation about the fact that MPs are protected by parliamentary privilege. Parliamentary privilege is important because it is designed to ensure that Parliament can hold the Government to account without politicians being silenced or intimidated by the Government, the courts or powerful individuals. It exists to protect Parliament's ability to function, not to give MPs unrestricted personal immunity from the law and to imply that it does is misleading in itself! So, I have asked ChatGPT to give me 3 examples of where this protection is particularly important ' 1 - Speaking against the Government: an MP can accuse a minister of wrongdoing in the Commons without facing a defamation lawsuit simply for making that statement in parliamentary proceedings. 2 - Investigating powerful people: MPs and select committees can scrutinise public bodies, corporations and government decisions without witnesses or members being intimidated by threats of legal action. 3 - Representing constituents: MPs can raise allegations of malpractice and matters of public concern that might otherwise be difficult to discuss openly. Without these protections, there is a risk that wealthy individuals, corporations or the Government could use litigation to suppress legitimate scrutiny. Further information regarding parliamentary privilege can be found here - parliament.uk/business/publi… Fact is - changing the underlying legal protection in Article 9 is more complicated and it would require clear legislation rather than simply relying on a change of parliamentary rules. The privilege is a constitutional protection, not merely an internal policy and we MUST stay focused that parliamentary privilege was created to protect democracy from interference, NOT to place politicians above the law. This is why our conversations and considerations as a campaign group have been extremely important. Let's remember campaigners like myself, Margaret Aspinall, Sue Roberts and Steve Kelly have been working extremely hard on the legislation for 10 years. The wider campaign group was formed in 2022. So, these topics are not things that we have simply ignored, over looked or been ignorant to. We have had to carefully consider what we are supporting, what we are putting our name to, what we have contributed to the creation of. Do we be responsible for the eradication of Parliamentary Privilege and take on the battle of changing the rules of the Crown? OR do we stay focused and remember that the current legislation in the form that it is now will apply to over 6 MILLION public organisations, professionals, individuals. All of which, INCLUDING MPs and Ministers and the Prime Minister......, will have a legal duty to assist with investigations, inquiries and inquests. Would we want it on our conscience that an MP could not go into parliament and call Boris Johnson and Matt Hancock out for their failures when it came to their diabolical handling of the Covid Pandemic and highlight the fact that they clearly prioritised ensuring their mates companies got millions of pounds? One of the fundamental values of our campaign groups is that ALL bring together our lived experiences to protect other people and whilst everyone is entitled to put forward their own amendment it is disgraceful to imply that we are in some way failing, or blind to the facts. This Bill consumes us. Day in, day out, we work on it. Some more than others. We are not here for our egos. We are here to protect future generations from suffering like we did and that includes being realistic to existing regulations, rules, and legislative frameworks!!!