§ 28. Mr. Manderasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will consider the advisability of making a Regulation under the Defence of the Realm Act permitting an appeal to be 17 made to the courts against the suppression of a newspaper but enabling suppression to be maintained until the decision of the courts has been made?
§ The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Peake)No. Sir. Apart from other objections to this proposal, my right hon. Friend thinks it is important that, if action is taken under Defence Regulation 2D, the House of Commons should have on early opportunity of expressing its approval or disapproval, and this would not be possible while the matter was awaiting review by the courts.
§ Mr. ManderWould not a great deal of uneasiness be removed if this concession were made, as it would still permit the Government to take immediate action for the suppression of a newspaper?
§ Mr. PeakeThat raises political issues of great importance. My right hon. Friend thinks it is important that the House of Commons should have an early opportunity of expressing its views on the question.
§ Mr. ManderDoes not the Minister appreciate that the House of Commons is not a judicial tribunal, but a political body? Ought not a person affected by an act of the Government have recourse to the courts?
§ Mr. PeakeMy hon. Friend must see that, if there is an appeal to the courts, the processes of appeal and so forth may result in there being an interval of weeks, if not of months, before the House of Commons can discuss the matter.
§ Mr. G. StraussIs not the Minister aware that the main objection to putting the case of the "Daily Worker" before the courts, as stated by the Home Secretary, is that it would take weeks or months before the issue could be decided and that the "Daily Worker" would be appearing all that time; whereas, under the procedure suggested by the hon. Gentleman, that objection would be overcome?