Tynwald members have insisted the rushing through of a new law on parliamentary privilege was not an attempt to cover up anything.

In a move unprecedented in recent political history, the Tynwald Proceedings (Amendment) Bill was passed through all stages of the scrutiny process in both the House of Keys and Legislative Council on Tuesday.

Normally legislative scrutiny takes place over a number of weeks to give politicians - and the public - time to assess the implications.

The urgency was because of ’live proceedings’, said deputy speaker Chris Robertshaw, and that without putting parliamentary privilege laws on a statutory footing, it risked Tynwald select committees not being able to guarantee confidentiality to witnesses when necessary.

That privilege, as set out in the Bill, will protect Tynwald members from facing action over anything they say in parliament and will also prevent court action that would force them to release information that had been supplied confidentially.

Such was the apparent urgency to get the Bill through, MHKs approved on the nod technical amendments to the draft legislation even though they had not been formally circulated - accepting an assurance from Clare Barber (Douglas East) on the wording.

There was no actual debate at any of the three reading stages in the Keys during which members normally discuss the contents of draft legislation.

However, Home Affairs Minister Bill Malarkey admitted he had initially held some reservations about rushing the Bill through - and said he was approached by some concerned at a cover-up.

But, after making inquiries about the reasons, he was satisfied the process was valid to protect the work of future select committees.

’We cannot allow the public or anybody else to think we are doing this because we are trying to cover something up in the present select committees or ongoing cases,’ he said.

’I am quite happy, from my inquiries this is not the case.’

Mr Robertshaw agreed.

He said: ’It would appear that there is some misunderstanding in the public and in the media with regard to the speed that we wish to take this Bill through.

’This is not in any way, shape or form a determination to hide anything. It protects parliament, it protects our citizens.’

Earlier, when seeking permission to shelve the normal rules that limit the number of different readings of a single bill to one per Keys sitting, Mr Robertshaw said: ’The background to this bill is that there are live proceedings which make it necessary to settle in statute the privileges of Tynwald on the same basis as enjoyed by parliaments throughout the Commonwealth.’

He said the law on privilege ’allows parliaments to function’ and protected freedom of speech in Tynwald and ’exclusive cognisance’ - the right for internal affairs not to be interfered with by courts or tribunals.

The ability to be able to promise confidentiality to witnesses in some parliamentary investigations was crucial, he said.

’Inquiries on sensitive topics would not be able to proceed successfully without being able to give such guarantees.’

He added that the law on privilege already applied to Tynwald but there was a shortage of case law and the advice given was it needed to be confirmed in statute.

But he acknowledged the ’exceptional’ steps being taken to rush through the Bill, which were a ’reflection of the urgency of live proceedings’.

Once the Bill had passed through the Keys, in what may have been either a joke or - given the rush - a barbed comment, Speaker Juan Watterson said: ’We now have through the Keys a Bill that passed the Commons in, I think, 1688 - good to catch up!’

Just minutes later the Legislative Council rushed through all the scrutiny stages of the Bill, with barely any comment other than to support the process.

David Cretney, who took the Bill through, said it was more a case of clarifying the law rather than rectifying it. He said the situation was ’exceptional’.

The aim is for the Bill to become law next month.