Lord Falconer did not intend to penalise Miss Weleminsky

The Lord Chancellor was accused of contempt of Parliament over the suspension of a "whistleblower" who gave evidence to a select committee.

The committee accepted it had not been Lord Falconer's intention to discipline Judy Weleminsky and said no further action would be taken.

Miss Weleminsky gave critical evidence about the Children and Family Court Advisory Service (CAFCASS) in 2003.

Possible breach

The standards committee also found that a senior official in the Department for Constitutional Affairs and the former CAFCASS chairman committed a contempt of Parliament over the disciplining of Miss Weleminsky, a former CAFCASS board member. No action will be taken against them.

Life is made very difficult for them - I think that's not right Judy Weleminsky on whistleblowers

Ms Weleminsky faced disciplinary action from her employer after giving evidence to the Constitutional Affairs Committee.

The committee referred the case to the Standards and Privileges Committee as a possible breach of parliamentary privilege.

Parliamentary privilege exists, in part, to ensure that witnesses do not face adverse consequences as a result of evidence they have given to a parliamentary committee .

'New brand'

Ms Weleminsky, who was suspended from the CAFCASS board after she gave evidence to the select committee, said she was "very pleased" at Thursday's findings.

But she said there was now a need to look at the wider responsibilities of people in public life.

She said she was one of a new brand of "whistleblowers" who, if they make their concerns public, get "slapped down, suspended, dismissed from their jobs, censured".

"Life is made very difficult for them - I think that's not right," she added.

She said people like her, in public life, had a responsibility to the public to be open and honest, and not to try and cover up problems.

And she wanted to see much stronger support for people who wanted to speak out.