HC Deb 05 March 1926 vol 192 cc1771-4
Mr. STEPHEN

I desire, Mr. Speaker, to put a question to you with reference to a matter of Order arising out of the suspension yesterday of the hon. Member for the Govan Division of Glasgow (Mr. Neil Maclean). I do not wish to raise any question with regard to the circumstances, but in regard to the term for which the suspension stands. Standing Order No. 18 remains indefinite, and as the Order stands it would appear that the hon. Member will be suspended indefinitely until Prorogation, or a period as decided by a Motion carried in the House. I wish to ask you whether my interpretation of the existing Rule is correct, and then I desire to put another point to you afterwards.

Mr. SPEAKER

The hon. Member's interpretation is quite correct.

Mr. STEPHEN

The other point is one which I should like to have put to the Leader of the House, had he been present, but, as you are the guardian of the rights of Members, I desire to point out that the Leader of the House in a previous case, after this Rule had become indefinite, stated in the case of Mr. Dillon: I am prepared to answer the question which the right hon. Gentleman has put to me. The history of the Standing Order given by the hon. and learned Member is, I believe, absolutely correct. The new Standing Order has not yet been framed, the discussion having been interrupted when the House had decided to omit the old terms of suspension. The House in fact has not done more than pronounce its view that some alteration should be made in the periods for which suspension should be inflicted for breaches of the Orders of the House. It has not yet said what the new terms are to be. I think it would be most improper to take advantage of this to inflict on the hon. Member for East Mayo a sentence longer than the Standing Order in process of alteration provided originally, and I have no right to say that the term should be that which the Government propose in their Amendment of the Order. I will not pronounce any view of what sentence in strict Parliamentary ethics the offence deserved, but I think it is quite clear that until the House decides on the final form of the Order there should be no addition to the term as the Order stood at the beginning of the Session. I think the House generally will agree that that would be an equitable treatment of the matter. I desire to submit to you this question, whether the old Rule should not be made operative by Motion of the Leader of the House. There have been other instances. I myself was unfortunate enough in this respect as the term for which I was absent from the House, before my suspension was removed, was longer than the period which had been contemplated for a second offence by the Government of the day responsible for the beginning of the alteration of the Order. I submit that it should be put to the Leader of the House as to whether the old Rule should operate. The present Leader of the House has himself suggested that the present position puts an invidious re- sponsibility upon him, and I submit to you that, if you are of the opinion that the old Rule should operate, then the Leader of the House would be freed from this invidious responsibility and Members would know where they were, until such time as the House has had an opportunity of deciding what the penalty ought to be.

Mr. SPEAKER

That is not a matter upon which it is for me to express an opinion. It is a matter which can only be dealt with by the House. If the hon. Member desires to raise the question, he must raise it by question, of which notice has been given in the ordinary way.

Mr. STEPHEN

On that point, and by way of explanation, may I say that I did acquaint the Leader of the House that I intended to raise this question this morning. I was perfectly well aware that the question should be addressed to him, but I thought you, Sir, as Speaker of the House, in a matter like this should also take the opportunity, as I have noticed you sometimes do, of expressing what seems to you to be the satisfactory position, in a case where circumstances have arisen owing to the Rule being indefinite.

Mr. SPEAKER

I do not think it would be for me to do that. I can only say that it was a very persistent offence, and I gave the hon. Member every chance.

Mr. STEPHEN

In saying that, I did not wish to comment in any way upon the circumstances of the case of the hon. Member for Govan. The point I was trying to make was that the position in regard to the Rule is so indefinite and so unsatisfactory that I suggested you, as the Speaker, should in the circumstances take some action in the interest of the House.

Mr. SPEAKER

I am not prepared at the present stage to take any such action.

Mr. MAXTON

Would it be in Order for hon. Members to table a Resolution calling attention to the action and attitude of the Minister which has led up to the suspension of two hon. Members, and secure an opportunity for the discussion of such a Resolution.

Mr. SPEAKER

No. That is entirely a matter for me. It was a matter between the Chair and the hon. Member.

Mr. MAXTON

We do not accept that on these benches.