LAW OF LIBEL AMENDMENT BILL [Lords]. (Hansard, 23 November 1927)

§ Mr. BUCHANAN
On this Motion I wish to ask one or two questions. Would the right hon. and gallant Gentleman who is moving it inform me how many times the Select Committee on this Bill have met; and, secondly, what stage the Committee have reached in their proceedings?

§ Colonel GIBBS (Treasurer of the Household):
The question of the sittings of the Committee has nothing to do with me, though I believe that this Committee has held a meeting. All I am doing by this Motion is asking the House to substitute one Member for another.

§ Mr. BUCHANAN
This point involves an important principle. If I were assured that this Select Committee had only held one meeting I might not take any objection. My point has nothing to do with the personnel of the Committee, and I think it is a good custom of this House that when a Conservative, Labour or Liberal Member has to be replaced on a Committee, another Member of the same party should be substituted. I raise this point in no hostile spirit, but I think it is one to which this House and particularly the Party Whips ought to give some attention. Supposing this particular Committee had held a number of meetings, had gone fully into the question of the law of libel and had examined witnesses and papers, I submit that it would be wrong to appoint a new member in the midst of these proceedings instead of reopening the whole matter and starting de novo. I suggest that it is not right to appoint a member who 1807 would be called upon to give a vote without being fully informed of all the facts which had previously been before the Committee. This particular Committee was appointed in the month of July last year and they might have held a good many meetings since, and to appoint a new member now would appear to be bad tactics and bad form. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury who is, I am sure, anxious to facilitate the business of the House, will, on the next occasion of this kind see to it that the House is informed of the number of meetings held by a Committee and the stage which it has reached in its work. We can then decide whether or not it would be advisable to reconstitute) the Committee and start afresh. In a case where only one meeting has been held I think a Motion of this kind might be allowed to go unopposed, but the principle involved is important and should be examined by the House before we thoughtlessly pass Motions of this kind.

§ Mr. SPEAKER
Under the Standing Orders only one Member can speak on each side in reference to a Motion of this kind.

§ Colonel GIBBS
Perhaps I had better answer the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan).

§ Mr. SPEAKER
I am afraid the hon. and gallant Gentleman has exhausted his right to speak.