§ Mr. MACLEANI beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, "the action of the Scottish Office in giving advice to the Town Clerk of Kilmarnock entirely contrary to Section 7, Sub-section (2) of the Police (Scotland) Regulations, 1920."
§ Mr. SPEAKERThis is not a matter which, in my opinion, comes within the definition of the Standing Order. It appears to relate to a difference of opinion between the hon. Member and some official as to the interpretation of a Police Regulation. That in itself is a matter which could be discussed in Com- 1046 mittee of Supply, but it is certainly not a matter on which the hon. Member can, move the Adjournment of the House.
§ Mr. MACLEANIt is not a question of difference of interpretation, but a, question of the advice given being entirely contradictory to the wording of the Regulation. The matter could easily be put right by the Secretary for Scotland reading the Regulation now, and you would see at once, Mr. Speaker, that the interpretation put upon it by the Scottish Office is entirely contradictory to the Regulation as passed.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI have heard the views expressed by the hon. Member, and all I can say is that that may be the hon. Member's view. But, clearly, there was a difference of opinion as to the meaning of the Regulation. That is not a question which can be dealt with under Standing Order No. 10.
§ Mr. MACLEANAs this affects a large number of the constabulary in Scotland, it is better that the matter should be cleared up. If the individuals in question, whom this particular interpretation affects, choose to take this question into Court, will the Ministers of the Crown claim their ordinary prescriptive rights in regard to the matter with which they have been dealing on this question?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member's statement makes me absolutely sure that, as there may be a question of law in the matter, it cannot be raised on the Adjournment of the House.
§ Mr. MACLEANWith all due deference to you, Mr. Speaker, this is not a question of law. I am putting a hypothetical question, since it seems that I am unable to get the matter properly debated in this House. This question affects a large number of police constables, and it must be decided somewhere. The police hold and their union hold that the proper view is the one which I have taken. The Secretary for Scotland and the Scottish Office have taken an entirely different view.
§ Mr. SPEAKERIt may be that the question will be decided in a Court of Law; that I cannot say. I am quite clear that it can be discussed in Committee of Supply, on the action of the Minister.