PRIVILEGE (COMPLAINT). (Hansard, 19 December 1946)

§ Mr. Speaker
The House will be aware that it was reported to me during this Sitting, that an alleged assault had been made upon a Member of Parliament within the precincts of the House. I, therefore, directed the Serjeant at Arms to make inquiries, and report to the House. I now call upon the Serjeant at Arms to come to the Table, and make his Report to the House.

The Serjeant at Arms
(at the Table): According to your instructions, Mr. Speaker, I investigated the facts in connection with the disturbance- within the precincts of the House of which complaint was made by the hon. Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Bowles). I have to report that a disturbance undoubtedly occurred within the precincts, but the evidence appears to be conflicting, and further investigation is required to determine the actual facts of the case.

§ Mr. Speaker
Perhaps it would be for the convenience of the House now, seeing that one hon. Member of the House who took part in this affair is present, if he would perhaps wish to say something before I declare whether this is a prima facie case or not.

§ Mr. Piratin (Mile End)
Mr. Speaker, in the first place I should really apologise for the fact that twice in the one day I should have been the centre of a personal matter. But in view of the fact that, as with many other hon. Members of this House, I regard this event, not as a personal matter, but an affront to the dignity of the House, it is in that light that I have raised the matter. There were actually two events. On the first occasion, in the cafeteria, this man did attack me after having used offensive remarks. On that occasion I struck him. I am apologetic, and I express my deep regret that I should have struck him, in spite of the provocation which I received. And if I may say so, I did what any other Member of the House would have done in the circumstances. He not only insulted me, but he also insulted my race. The second occasion was one and a half hours later, when the whole matter, so far as I was concerned, was forgotten, except that I was going to make a formal report to the Serjeant at Arms with whom I had an appointment at 6.45 p.m. I was upstairs to meet a reporter, and as I left the reporters' room, this man deliberately attacked me when I was not in a position to defend myself and struck me as, of course, the House can see for itself. It was on that occasion, Sir, that I felt there was no ground whatsoever for the attack. This man's evidence had already been taken by a policeman, and as far 2325 as I was concerned, my statement was waiting to be submitted to the Serjeant at Arms Therefore, although I express my deep regret to the House, in all sincerity, that I did allow provocation to incite me to return the blow, in the first place, I must ask you, Sir, and the House of Commons, to take into account the second occasion, which was absolutely unprovoked and, further, was premeditated, in view of the fact that the man had said in the cafeteria after the first event, Wait until I get you alone," Therefore, I have reason to believe that it was premeditated, and I am prepared to leave the matter in the hands of you, Mr. Speaker, and of the House.

§ Mr. Speaker
Perhaps it would also be for the convenience of the House to say that, as Speaker, I have received a letter which perhaps, in fairness to the other side, I should read. It reads: Sir—I beg your leave and indulgence to express to you and, through you, to the House of Commons, my profound regret that I should have been involved in an affair within the precincts with a Member of your honourable House. I deeply regret my part in what occurred, and ask you to believe, Sir, that no disrespect was ever intended to you or the dignity of the Commons, either individually or collectively I hope, Sir, that you will be generous enough to extend to me your leniency and forgiveness. During eight years as a member of the Press Gallery, I have never been hitherto involved in any untoward incident, and I trust that you will believe me when I say that I shall never allow it to occur again. I repeat my sincere regrets to you, Sir, and to the House of Commons, the dignity of which I had within my limited sphere, diligently sought to preserve.

§ The Lord President of the Council (Mr. Herbert Morrison)
I am sure the whole House will agree that we all regret that this incident has occurred at all. The hon. Member for Mile End (Mr. Piratin) has recounted the incidents as he recalls them, and has expressed regret, up to a point, for the part which he has played. On the other hand, the journalist has expressed very deep regret for the part he has played. In these circumstances, this is a very human affair, in which there was a sharp difference of opinion. I want to say, straight away, that if there was any question of a Member of Parliament being assaulted by a stranger in the discharge of his duties, my bias and, I am sure, 2326 that of all hon. Members of this House, would be with the Member. Hon. Members of this House must be protected against any degree of physical assault. On the other hand, the account of the hon. Member for Mile End does leave the issue a bit uncertain, as to which party played this part, and which the other, if taken in conjunction with the report of the journalist. The facts are pretty clear, and the question is whether, the issue having been boiled down to a somewhat fine point, the House wishes to make heavy weather of it, or not such heavy weather. This is an occasion when the House should have a sense of proportion. The hon. Member for Mile End has been straightforward and very reasonable in the matter, and if it had been the case that he had been the victim of any unqualified and unprovoked assault on the part of anybody—I do not care, as Leader of the House of Commons, what political colour is concerned—I would say I would always defend the rights of hon. Members of this House, and I do not care whether a Member is popular or unpopular, or whether he represents a majority or a small minority.
The hon. Member has expressed, up to a point, an indication of regret. Tempers were flying a bit, and perhaps he did one or two things which he would not have done on reflection. On the other hand, the journalist is apologetic. He admits that he is wrong, and no doubt his employers will take account of whether he had better function in the House of Commons, or somewhere else. I must say that it is profoundly important that journalists who function in this House should function in the spirit of this House, and if their temperament is such that they cannot live with this House, then their employers might say, "Well, brother, you had better do a job somewhere else and not in the House of Commons". If that be the case, I hope it will be so. Both sides have indicated that they are not sure about the matter, and there is an expression of complete regret on the part of the journalist and, on the part of the hon. Member for Mile End, a partial regret.
The only question that remains for the House is whether this matter should go to the Committee of Privileges, which is a very high-powered affair, where we would hear evidence from the parties to the dispute and thereafter report to the House. If the House feels that to be 2327 necessary, it can go to the Committee of Privileges, but I feel that in view of the observations of the hon. Member for Mile End and the communication Mr. Speaker has received from the journalist, the issues are perhaps rather fine between them. I should have thought that having heard the observations of the hon. Member for Mile End, and the observations of the journalist, together with, the report of the Serjeant at Arms, we might take note of those statements and let it go at that. I think honour is served all round. We shall all learn from the experience, and might we not avoid making terribly heavy weather of it by referring it to the Committee of Privileges?
I would hope that the House would take note of what has been said and thereafter let the matter pass, on the understanding that the rights of Members of this House must be maintained and that if any stranger, whoever he may be, interferes with a Member of this House in the discharge of his duties, or makes any physical assault upon him this House will defend that Member, whoever he may be. Upon that I think we must agree, but in view of the statement of the hon. Member for Mile End and that made in writing to Mr. Speaker, from the journalist concerned, I should have thought we could take note of what they say and pass on, thus avoiding the rather unnecessarily high-powered reference to the Committee of Privileges.

§ Mr. Sydney Silverman (Nelson and Colne)
On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker, I suggest to you with great respect and some diffidence that the proceedings are getting a little out of hand. It seems to me—and I ask for your guidance in the matter—that before this House is entitled to discuss what it will do with this incident, it is for you, Sir, to decide whether a prima facie case is made out. If in fact it has been made out, then the House may decide to do one thing or another with it, but surely your decision should be made first?

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Member is in error there. Once I declare the matter to be a prima facie case, the Leader of the House has no option but to refer it to the Committee of Privileges. For that reason I was deferring the matter, on purpose to hear the views of the House.

§ Earl Winterton (Horsham)
On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker, what is the Question before the House?

§ Mr. Speaker
Actually there is no question at the moment, but if the Leader of the House chooses to move that we take note of the statement of the Serjeant at Arms, that suits me.

§ Mr. Churchill (Woodford)
We all appreciate the conciliatory spirit in which the Leader of the House has addressed himself to this topic, and many will feel that there is great wisdom in his idea that it ought to slide away and be passed off, without making heavy weather of it, and so on. At the same time, I must be permitted, if I may, with great respect to the Chair and to the Leader of the House, to submit to the House that there are certain rather serious principles involved. I do not think it right that hon. Members of the House of Commons should be knocked about by strangers when they are in the precincts of the Palace of Westminster. I am not in favour of that. It matters to me nothing whether they are Communists, or Socialists, or Tories, or whatever they may be. This is a great institution and it must guard its rights with great care. Some time ago we had a talk about a poster and all that, and examined it in the Committee of Privileges. This is a case of violence done in the precincts of the House of Commons, and it cannot go unmarked. It must be, in my opinion, examined by the Committee of Privileges. I most respectfully submit that it should be so examined. I cannot attempt to form an opinion from what I have heard in this House, but any hon. Member of this House who is assaulted or struck in the course of his work and life in the precincts of this Palace in which we live, has a right to require of the House of Commons that the matter shall be carefully and precisely investigated. If by chance a man had struck a blow and so on, of course there is a sort of British rule that alters the position a little. All the same, let us make sure of where we are. We are not going to have hon. Members of Parliament, whoever they may be —whether they are in a minority or unpopular or whatever it may be—assaulted by strangers in the precincts of the House of Commons. I, therefore, most respectfully submit to you, Sir, that the matter should go before the Committee of Privileges.

§ Mr. Speaker
I then rule that a prima facie case has been made out.

§ Mr. Morrison
Then, Sir, in that case may I say I was only trying—

§ Mr. Churchill
There is no real difference.

§ Mr. Morrison
— to get this matter settled amicably, if we could without bad blood on either side of the House. But in view of your Ruling, I beg to move, That the matter of the complaint, together with the Reports received by the Serjeant at Arms, be referred to the Committee of Privileges.

§ Earl Winterton
On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker, may I, on a personal matter, ask your permission and that of the House, in view of certain circumstances—this is an important matter because of the prerogative of the Committee of Privileges—to be excused from adjudicating on this particular matter?

§ Mr. Speaker
I do not know if I can give authority for that, because the noble Lord is elected by the House, but I certainly appreciate his reasons and quite understand them. He can use his own discretion in the matter.

§ Mr. Piratin
Further to that point of Order, Sir. May I for myself say that in view of the noble Lord's apology this afternoon, I, personally, would have no objection whatsoever, and would have confidence in the decision reached by the Committee of Privileges upon which the noble Lord sits.

§ Mr. Churchill
With great respect, it would be more becoming if my right hon. Friend did not present himself on that occasion to the Committee, and it would be a matter for the House to judge how the matter stood.

§ Mr. Speaker
Perhaps I might, for the noble Lord's consolation, say that this matter did not arise out of the incident this afternoon. It is another matter altogether.

§ Mr. C. S. Taylor (Eastbourne)
On a point of procedure, Mr. Speaker, may I ask what is going to happen to the other party in this dispute, particularly as the Christmas holidays are coming on?

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Member need not think that the other party to the dispute will be kept in close confinement. Now that the matter has been referred to the Committee of Privileges, I have no doubt that he will be able to go back home, and return to attend the Committee when he is summoned.

§ Mr. Churchill
With great respect, may I ask the Leader of the House whether it might not be possible to dispose of this matter tomorrow? It ought not to take very long.

§ Mr. Morrison
I do not know, I would not like to give an opinion on that right off. The right hon. Gentleman and I have had experience of the Committee of Privileges, and some of our proceedings have lasted a long time.

§ Mr. Churchill
They arrived at a good conclusion

§ Mr. Morrison
It may be so, but it took a long time; but if it can be disposed of tomorrow, and if I can help, I will. There are some other responsibilities to the Government that have to be carried on, but if I can help dispose of it tomorrow, I will. It may not be possible but in the meantime, I understand, Mr. Speaker, that the other party to the dispute will not necessarily be kept in durance vile.

§ Mr. Speaker
That is so. That is perfectly true. He can now be released.