HC Deb 10 May 1944 vol 399 cc1914-8
Mr. Bowles

I wish to ask the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, by private notice, a Question of which I gave him public notice yesterday, namely, whether he has any statement to make upon the inability of hon. Members to obtain adequate OFFICIAL REPORT reprints of their and other hon. Members' speeches.

Mr. Assheton

As you, Sir, explained to the House yesterday, there has been for many years an arrangement by which hon. Members could obtain reprints of their speeches from the type used by the Stationery Office to produce the OFFICIAL REPORT. In pre-war years there were some 50 or 60 demands a year, generally for a few hundred copies, very seldom exceeding 500, and it was possible to meet those demands from the standing type (which is afterwards used for the production of the bound volumes) with some economy to hon. Members and without any dislocation in the production of Parliamentary work.

As you, Sir, stated yesterday, the number of hon. Members asking for these reprints has increased: there were 112 demands in 1943; and last week orders came in for reprints amounting to 55,000, which, as you, Sir, said, showed that a new issue had arisen. Moreover, this demand has come at a time when the demand for HANSARD itself is increasing, and the sales to the public have in fact doubled within the last 12 months.

I was informed by the Stationery Office that it would not be possible to go on meeting demands on this scale without dislocating the normal production of the daily HANSARD and the timely publication of the bound volumes, and so I felt re- luctantly obliged to give instructions to the Stationery Office that for the time being reprints should be limited to a thousand copies of any particular speech. Moreover, it was brought to my notice that, as you, Sir, stated in the House yesterday, the charge for these reprints does not now cover the cost. It seems desirable that in any event that position should be remedied, and I have given instructions to the Stationery Office to examine afresh the scale of charges.

Hon. Members can, as they always could, get copies produced by a private printer, but doubtless it is the labour and paper difficulties in private industry which has encouraged them to put this additional strain on official printing, for of course when quantities such as 30,000 are involved the advantage of the use of standing type becomes relatively of little importance.

If and when the labour, materials and plant available for printing HANSARD become less restricted, I shall be very willing to consider the matter again in the light of the general feeling of the House at the time, but I am assured that the course now taken is the only alternative to a breakdown in the general arrangements, and I hope the House will agree that printing for public business, particularly the public business of the House itself, must always have precedence over the convenience of individual Members, and that in these very difficult times I have taken the best course in maintaining this long standing convenience within a limit which has obviously met the normal needs of most Members, at the expense of a restriction designed to meet a new situation newly arisen through the demands of the few who ask for very large quantities.

With regard to the future, while the Stationery Office will be ready and willing to carry out the wishes of the House, whatever they may be, I think it is not unimportant for the House to consider what might be the possible effect on the character of its Debates of a wide extension of the practice of reprinting on a large scale verbatim, individual speeches, as apart from reports of the Debate itself. This, however, is entirely a matter for the House when the time comes.

An hon. Member yesterday raised the question of the right of Members to obtain reprints of other hon. Members' speeches. It has not been the custom in the past for this convenience to be available to hon. Members, though on one or two occasions, by inadvertence, orders for copies by other hon. Members have been accepted. Moreover, there are certain legal difficulties in connection with the laws of libel which should not be overlooked in this connection.

Mr. Bowles

May I put it to my right hon. Friend that I have a constituency of 112,000 electors, and that 1,000 copies are completely useless to give any idea at all as to what takes place, so far as Opposition speeches are concerned, in a Debate, the Government speeches in which are very fully reported in the public Press? A very important Debate took place last Friday week, and I asked for 10,000 copies of the speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. A. Bevan). I was associated with him, not in taking part in the Debate, but in the division. My constituents have a perfect right to know, as I see it, the case against the Regulation. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I cannot feel at all satisfied that the answer is anything like fair to the minority opinion in this House of Commons.

Commander Sir Archibald Southby

May I ask for your guidance, Mr. Speaker, on an important point which has arisen out of the question asked by the hon. Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Bowles)? He is reported in HANSARD as saying yesterday that he had on numerous occasions given orders for speeches of hon. Members other than his own. I have always understood that the copyright of the speeches of the hon. Members of this House is vested in the Stationery Office, so that hon. Members who are able to obtain permission from the Stationery Office may reprint their own speeches, if they wish, and if the public want to read them. Is it in Order that any hon. Member should have the right to ask for a reprint of another hon. Member's speech?

Mr. Speaker

That is a question not for me but for the Stationery Office, but I believe that it is a question in which the law of libel may be involved.

Mr. Bowles

The right hon. Gentleman himself said that there would be no objection to buying copies of HANSARD as a whole to give an idea of the Debate. I raised a question on the Adjournment, and I bought a copy of my speech and the Minister's reply. I do not see that the law of libel is involved, because we are, in any case, privileged.

Commander Locker-Lampson

Ought we not to protect the constituents of the hon. Member, Mr. Speaker, and stop him flooding them with speeches they may not want?

Mr. Wakefield

I would like to ask your guidance, Sir. Does the expense of circulating matters of this kind to that extent become liable to be entered as election expenses?

Mr. Speaker

That is a point which might be put to my Conference in due course.

Mr. Stokes

Could I put this question to the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Sir, in view of the statement he has just made? Will he bear in mind that, since the Press has become virtually Government-controlled or, to a very large extent, controlled by people who support the Government, the minority view is not put? Some of us for a very long time have been having reprints of our speeches in order that our own constituents may know the truth of what we say instead of the misrepresentations put in the Press. Will he bear in mind that an issue of 1,000 reprints is quite inadequate? If he will consider the possibility of an increase, will he compare the demand over the next three months with what the demand has been on the average over the last six months?

Sir William Davison

rose—

Mr. Stokes

May I have an answer, please?

Mr. Speaker

I think the Financial Secretary has risen to reply.

Mr. Assheton

With regard to the question put by the hon. Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Bowles), I quite understand that he has 100,000 constituents, but so have I. If the hon. Member is to exercise his privilege, we shall obviously get into a very great difficulty. It was because we were running into difficulties that it was necessary to make this move. With regard to the question put by the hon. Member for Ipswich (Mr. Stokes), while not accepting what he said, I do not think it is my business to deal with the question.

Viscountess Astor

Is it quite fair, Mr. Speaker—

Mr. Bowles

On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker.

Sir W. Davison

May I put my Question now, Sir?

Mr. Bowles

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, and also in view of the fact that the recent release of 11½ per cent. newsprint to the Press has not been taken up by all the national Press, I beg to give notice that I shall put down a reduction of the salary of the Financial Secretary to the Treasury on the appropriate Vote, with the permission of my colleagues.

Sir W. Davison

May I put my Question, Sir?