HC Deb 22 November 1949 vol 470 cc204-6
Earl Winterton

May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, on a matter of which I have previously given notice, for a Ruling on the admissibility of Questions relating to the Press? It is based upon a Question asked by the hon. Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Beswick) last week, the gist of which was to ask whether a committee would be set up to investigate charges made by the "Sunday Express" newspaper, that officials of nationalised industries are using their position to buy motor cars through official channels. I am not challenging the action of the Clerks at the Table responsible for passing the Question. If I were to do that, it would be obligatory on me to put down a Motion. I am only asking for information. I think that it will be agreed that it is an established Ruling of successive occupants of the Chair that a question challenging the accuracy of a newspaper report cannot appear on the Order Paper, since no Minister is officially responsible for the newspapers, using that phrase in its widest sense. My respectful request is for a Ruling whether in future it will be possible to put in the guise of a Question a similar demand to that put by the hon. Member for Uxbridge for a committee of inquiry, whenever an hon. Member considers that a particular newspaper has published false information regarding the speech or activities of a Minister responsible for a Government Department or a nationalised industry.

Mr. Speaker

I am much obliged to the noble Lord for putting his question. I think that his question is quite accurate, and that the answer I must give will be exactly what he wants.

The Question to which the noble Lord refers was first handed in by the hon. Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Beswick) and carefully considered from the point of view of Ministerial responsibility. It was slightly amended, in agreement with the hon. Member, to its final form and then passed, bearing in mind that the House had recently discussed the Report of the Royal Commission on the Press and had also heard Questions answered on the subject raised in the hon. Member's Question. Perhaps I might add that so far as my recollection goes, in view of what happened then, and the previous Questions asked on this matter, it was referred to me, and I gave my answer, giving him the benefit of the doubt. Looking back on the matter now in the light of the noble Lord's argument, I have come to the conclusion that the Question should not have been allowed, and it cannot be in order to ask for a committee of inquiry into charges made by a newspaper or, indeed, on any other newspaper statement. To allow such a Question would tend to infringe Rule 15 on page 337 of Erskine May. If there is any blame attached, I take the blame myself because I passed the Question.

Mr. Beswick

I have listened to your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, with some interest, and, for my part, I accept, as I must do, what you have said. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Horsham (Earl Winterton) said that the reason for my Question was that I wished to attack a newspaper—[Interruption.]—Oh, yes, that I wished to attack a newspaper, and he imputed a motive of my own in putting down that Question. May I say that in fact I did not come to this House in order to attack a newspaper. I first of all wrote to the editor of the "Sunday Express' asking if he would be good enough to give me the details on which he based certain charges, and the editor of the newspaper concerned wrote to me a short note—

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member may later on, if he chooses, make a personal statement, but this is not the moment to debate my Ruling.

Mr. Nally

This is an important matter, and may I ask you, Mr. Speaker, if you will define it a little more extensively. Let us suppose, as a hypothetical case, that a Question is put on the Order Paper based upon a newspaper account of something alleged to be done in a Government Department as a consequence of which the hon. Member has put down a Question. There then follows a supplementary question in which the hon. Member asking the supplementary question of the right hon. Gentleman mentions that the basis of the question is a specific newspaper. Are we to assume from your Ruling that it will in point of fact be out of Order, either directly or indirectly, to suggest in this House that the editorial methods of a particular newspaper in relation to a particular story stand in need of some attention?

Mr. Speaker

If I was quick enough I should rule the supplementary out of Order. The basis of a Question is that the hon. Member takes responsibility for it himself. I think that we had a case in point two or three days ago when there was an alleged strike in Walsall and the hon. Member for King's Norton (Mr. Blackburn) complained that because he refused to make a statement in a Question that there was such a strike going on the Question was not accepted but that the hon. Member for Walsall (Mr. W. Wells) and another hon. Member—I forget who it was—took the responsibility and therefore their Question went on the Order Paper. Hon. Members cannot quote what a newspaper says. They must take the responsibility themselves.

Mr. Beswick

Would I be in Order to ask what progress has been made towards setting up a Press Council?

Mr. Speaker

I think that my Ruling covers that. I really do not know where Ministerial responsibility lies in that case. What I would suggest is that the hon. Member tries it—that he puts a Question down, and sees what happens..

Mr. Mikardo

Would your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, that it is inadmissible to ask a Minister whether he will set up a Commission and investigate a statement made in a newspaper, also apply to a Question asking the Minister to set up a committee to investigate a statement made publicly in some other form, for example, in a broadcast or in a public speech by an individual?

Mr. Speaker

In vain is the net spread in the sight of the bird. I am not going to answer a hypothetical question. I would like to see it in writing first, and then I will answer it.

Mr. H. D. Hughes

Following your reference to the Walsall question, may the House take it, Mr. Speaker, that there is nothing in your Ruling which would prevent Press stories being exposed in this House by hon. Members taking the responsibility for the facts and asking supplementary questions based on them, as was the case in that particular instance?

Mr. Speaker

I think that was covered by my Ruling the other day.