CZECHOSLOVAKIA. (Hansard, 21 March 1938)

45. Mr. Vyvyan Adams
asked the Prime Minister, whether he will give a specific guarantee of the independence of Czechoslovakia?

§ The Prime Minister
I have nothing at present to add to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Jarrow (Miss Wilkinson) in reply to a similar question on 16th March last.

Mr. Adams
In the meantime, may I ask the Prime Minister whether the Biggleswade speech of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour—

§ Mr. Speaker
rose—

Mr. Adams
On a point of Order— [Interruption.]

§ Mr. A. V. Alexander
The question put by the hon. Member for West Leeds (Mr. V. Adams) is of very great importance to Europe at the present time. The statement by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour is reported to have been circulated on the German wireless as representative of the view of the British Government. In such circumstances, ought not Members of this House to be entitled to ask for a specific statement from the Government?

§ Mr. Speaker
The matter does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

§ Mr. Attlee
On the point of Order. May I put it to you, Mr. Speaker, that the question is with regard to the attitude of His Majesty's Government towards Czechoslovakia, and a statement has been made during the week-end by one of His Majesty's Ministers indicating a certain attitude? Is not the House entitled to ask the Prime Minister whether, when that Minister was speaking, he was representing the views of His Majesty's Government or his own?

§ Mr. Speaker
With regard to statements made by Ministers in the country, it has often been asked in this House whether 839 the views expressed by Ministers represent the views of the Government, but it has never been allowed in any question on the Paper that, with regard to the views of an Under-Secretary, it should be asked whether they represent the views of the Government.

§ Mr. Attlee
May I remind you of the case of the Noble Lord the Member for Aldershot (Viscount Wolmer), who made a certain statement which was brought up in this House, and the then Prime Minister, now Lord Baldwin, dissociated himself from the remarks of that Minister and said that they represented his private views?

§ Mr. Speaker
I have not had time to look up that particular instance, but I know that the practice of the House is, and always has been, not to allow such questions.

Mr. Adams
Does that mean, then, that an Under-Secretary can make a statement in the country without binding His Majesty's Government?

§ Mr. Speaker
It does not mean anything more than it says. It has reference to questions in the House on the subject.

§ The Prime Minister
In view of your Ruling, may I ask whether it would be impossible for any question to be put down to His Majesty's Government upon this subject, and whether, therefore, no opportunity can be given to me to make a statement to the effect that my hon. Friend does not accept the report of his speech as correct?

§ Mr. Speaker
My Ruling refers to questions on the Paper, but supplementary questions also must be guided by the same rule as questions on the Paper. With regard to statements which can be made on other occasions, that, of course, is a different thing.

§ Sir A. Sinclair
If the Prime Minister is able to answer the question, surely a back-bench Member ought to be able to put it?

§ Mr. Speaker
As I have said, it is not the practice of the House to allow such questions.

§ Sir A. Sinclair
In view of the Prime Minister's willingness to answer, might not my hon. Friend the Member for North 840 Cumberland (Mr. W. Roberts) be allowed to put at the end of questions the question which he asked your permission to put by private notice on this very point?

§ Mr. Speaker
No; that would raise the same point of Order.

§ Mr. Shinwell
Have you observed that the Prime Minister has already made an attempt to answer the question? May I ask him a supplementary question on his answer?

§ Mr. Speaker
That would be out of order.

Mr. V. Adams
Am I right in concluding that what you have just ruled does not infringe the rule of collective Cabinet responsibility?

Hon. Members
He is not in the Cabinet.

Mr. Adams
I know he is not in the Cabinet; that is the whole point of my last question.

§ Mr. Speaker
I did not refer to Cabinet Ministers.

§ Mr. Bellenger
On the point of Order that has been raised by the Leader of the Opposition, will it be possible, after you have considered the case he gave you, to reconsider this point and, if possible, allow a question to be put?

§ Mr. Benjamin Smith
In the light of your Ruling, would you consider it to be within your competence to inform the House what measure it can adopt to bring before the House the case of an Under-Secretary who has said something presumably detrimental to Government policy?

§ Mr. Speaker
I have already answered that question.

§ Sir A. Sinclair
Would it be in order for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour to make a personal statement on the subject at the end of Questions?

§ Miss Wilkinson
Not that anybody takes any notice of him, really.

§ Mr. Speaker
If any exception is taken to the conduct of any Member of the House, I am always willing to allow him to make a personal statement.

§ Sir A. Sinclair
On a point of Order. May I raise a question which has been referred to more than once already to-day, namely, the speech made by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour? A number of hon. Members have been surprised to see the reports of this speech in the papers, and a number of questions have been put to-day. The Prime Minister has stated that this speech has been wrongly reported and that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour is labouring at the present moment under a very unfair report of his speech, which was reported in the "Times," among other newspapers. Would it not be possible now, if the Prime Minister is correctly informed, for the Parliamentary Secretary to inform the House as to what, in fact, he did say, so as to remove the unfortunate impression which has been created?