THE so-called Wilson doctrine, which declared that communications by MPs and peers could not be spied on by the state, fell to bits yesterday when it was ruled meaningless by an investigatory powers tribunal.

State surveillance of anyone worries us but it is not the fact that our elected and unelected parliamentarians can be spied on which causes us the most concern – after all, ordinary citizens can be spied on, given certain state oversight, and MPs are nothing more than ordinary citizens given temporary powers by voters to work on our behalf.

Bad as it is, though, at least we now know we are all on an equal footing, with everyone – citizens and MPs and peers – all open to the predations of the security services and infringements of civil liberties, with no special status granted to parliamentarians, and no false elites created by phoney doctrines.

That said, what really worries us is this: if your MP can be spied on, then inevitably your communications with your MP are also open to interception by GCHQ or MI5 or MI6.

Firstly, this raises the question of who is being spied on and why. Might your privacy become "collateral damage" if spies were interested in an MP? Or would an MP become a target because a constituent under surveillance communicated with them? Will the innocent party be protected? Or will both the suspect and the innocent party be subject to breaches of privacy?

At its worst, such a state of affairs will have a deeply chilling effect on whistleblowers. MPs are often used as a conduit for constituents who want to lift the lid on matters of huge public interest.

MPs can then use parliamentary privilege to air the issue in the Commons. In turn that means the press can report matters that newspapers and broadcasters had little room to manoeuvre on. The whistleblower and their protection is a key cornerstone of democracy – take it away and the press falls silent and corruption and wrong-doing will flourish.

As Matthew Rice of Privacy International said yesterday: "mass surveillance affects us all. Anyone who has exchanged emails with their MP about a sensitive matter should be aware that government snoopers may have access to this personal information. From charity workers to politicians, lawyers to refugees, it is of great concern that the UK’s surveillance regime cannot function without interfering with everyone’s right to privacy, regardless of their need for professional confidentiality.”

That’s why specific protections for whistleblowers, and ordinary citizens in communication with their MP, must be drawn up in any future legislation of interception of communications.

GCHQ has the power to spy on calls and letters between MPs and the public

Scotland Office tells Whitehall of conversations between Holyrood ministers and foreign diplomats