§ Colonel BURTONI wish to bring to your notice, Sir, a statement which has appeared in a daily paper to-day which I consider to be a gross breach of the Privileges of this House. Over the head of the column, it says "Bondfield lies deliberately." Further down in the reading matter, it says:
We have no hesitation in categorically telling Margaret Bondfield that she is a deliberate and calculating liar.I wish to ask your Ruling as to whether it is not a gross breach of the Privileges of the House?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. and gallant Gentleman kindly gave me notice that he was going to raise this question, and I have given it some consideration. Questions of breach of Privilege are always rather difficult to decide, and I have looked up precedents which affect this particular case. I have come to the conclusion that I should not be justified in allowing the hon. and gallant Gentleman to make a Motion to refer this to the Committee of Privileges as a question of breach of Privilege because it is very distinctly laid down that Privilege cannot be claimed for a Motion containing imputations on the character of a Member 1389 not immediately connected with, in this case, her action in Parliament. As far as I can gather from the quotation from the newspaper that the hon. and gallant Gentleman has read, it does not reflect on the character of the Member in any particular immediately connected with any action of her's in Parliament. Therefore, that does not constitute a case for submission to the Committee of Privileges by a Motion of the House. I am fortified in the Ruling which I am now giving, because in the only case in which I could find that the Speaker of the time allowed a Motion of that kind to be put it was rejected by the House on the ground that it did not impute anything in connection with the Member's immediate duties in Parliament.
§ Colonel BURTONIn Erskine May there is a case on 22nd July, 1861—I think perhaps that is the case to which you, Sir, refer—when the Speaker said the quotation made from a paper on the conduct of the Member then concerned was such that it would reflect on his general moral character so far as his conduct in the House was concerned. The Speaker allowed a debate to take place, and, although it was rejected, it seems to me that with such a scurrilous statement as this there might be some record in the House that we dissent from it. Therefore, if I may, with the leave of the House, I would like to move a Motion to the effect that the passage complained of in the article in the "Daily Worker" to-day is a gross libel—
§ Mr. SPEAKERI have given a Ruling that it would not be in order to move a Motion of that kind in this particular case, and I do not think that the hon. and gallant Gentleman would be justified in debating that point.