HC Deb 25 July 1951 vol 491 cc593-600

Order read for resuming Adjourned Debate on Question [24th July], That Mr. William Barkley do attend this House this day.

9.36 p.m.

Mr. Speaker

I have a communication to read to the House, which I think I ought to put before the House. It reads as follows:

" To the Right Honourable the Speaker of the House of Commons.

SIR,

I deeply regret that what I wrote in the "Daily Express" of July 9th, which was intended jocularly, should have offended against the privileges of the House of Commons, and have given offence to Mr. Coldrick, whose honour as Chairman of a Select Committee of the House of Commons it was never my intention to impugn.

After my 27 years' experience of the working of the House of Commons and its system of Select Committees, it could not enter my mind for a moment that a Chairman of such a Committee would ever seek to further his personal interests. By the decision of the House, my words are held to have carried this implication, which was never intended, and, in these circumstances, I ask leave to appear at the Bar of the House to offer my apology to you, Mr. Speaker, to the House of Commons and to Mr. Coldrick, and to offer an explanation.

Your Obedient Servant,

WILLIAM BARKLEY."

9.37 p.m.

Captain Crookshank (Gainsborough)

This morning the House sat until a quarter to four, but as the daily HANSARD does not continue beyond about 10 o'clock, it is only those hon. Members who were actually present in the Chamber at the time who are aware of the full details of what occurred, though, of course, the result is known to them in the Votes and Proceedings issued this morning. From that, hon. Members will realise that the House last night came to a unanimous decision that the letter in the "Daily Express" by Mr. William Barkley constitutes a gross libel on the Chairman of a Select Committee and a contempt of this House. Later on, further discussion of the matter and on what should be done was adjourned.

From the letter which you have just read out, Mr. Speaker, it would seem that Mr. Barkley is fully seized of the feelings of the House arising out of the troubles which centred originally on the Chairman of the Kitchen Committee, and, having been seized of the opinion of the House, from what you have read out, he has sent to you, and I take it through you to us, his humble apologies for what he has written. He has made it clear, as I heard you read, Mr. Speaker—as clearly, I think, as could be put into words—that he never meant to impugn the honour of the hon. Gentleman and that he was quite certain from his long experience among us that it would never enter the head of any Chairman of any Select Committee, or indeed of any hon. Member to seek to further his own interest within the sphere of authority delegated to that Member by this House.

It seems to me, having heard this letter, that it is a full and ample apology in every way, and that, therefore the position tonight is that we have as a House—I agree there were not many Members here, but it was a representative assembly—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] It was not a full House, I agree; there was not a quarter of the number here now.

Mr. Manuel (Ayrshire, Central)

We were here.

Captain Crookshank

I know the hon. Gentleman was here, and he probably remembers that I was here, but we are not blowing our own trumpets. I am merely saying that it was not a very full House and that the matter was discussed pretty adequately by those of us present. We came to the decision, which cannot be impugned by anybody, that this matter was a libel on the Chairman and was a contempt of the House. As a result of that Mr. Barkley has, in my view, handsomely apologised for the error into which he had fallen.

I suggest with all humility to the House that it would now be consonant with our dignity, having received this full apology and having expressed our own opinion and taken our own decision with regard to the original matter, if we accepted the apology and let the matter drop.

9.42 p.m.

Mr. Coldrick (Bristol, North-East)

May I as the person who was most maligned in this most unfortunate affair say that I and my Committee will be glad to accept an apology which has been tendered to the House? I want to make it abundantly clear that so far as the Committee was concerned, we brought this special Report to the Members because we were conscious that it would be a serious thing for this House and the Members of it if we allowed people who enjoy our facilities to proceed to impute ill motives to Members who are discharging duties laid upon them by the House. Consequently we had no vindictiveness towards any individual. We wanted to vindicate the action we had taken collectively as members of the Committee.

I am particularly glad to think that in tendering this apology Mr. Barkley has at least indicated that he does not derive that sadistic pleasure from injuring innocent people which most of us had been led to assume. On the last occasion, I think, when someone ventured to charge members of the Kitchen Committee with the same kind of charge as Mr. Barkley has uttered, he was sent to the Tower. I am very pleased to think that on this occasion you, Mr. Speaker, have at least been relieved of the painful duty of sending Mr. Barkley to the Tower, because I do not think that even the Members on this side of the House would derive any pleasure in thinking that he was shivering in the Tower while we were tucked up in bed.

However, I want to make it clear in closing, that there may be an impression that in consequence of an incident of this character the relationship between ourselves and the members of the Press Gallery is somewhat estranged. I want to say most emphatically on behalf of the whole Committee that our relationship with the Press Gallery Committee that has worked with the Kitchen Committee has been most happy and friendly. I am positive that they regret this incident as much as Members of this House. Therefore, I thank the Members of this House for the action which they have taken. I think it was an action that became our own dignity, and on behalf of myself particularly, and also on behalf of the members of my Committee, I am prepared to accept the apology.

9.45 p.m.

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Ede)

In the early hours of this morning the House, after full deliberation, decided without a dissentient voice that the letter which was the subject of the Kitchen Committee's complaint was a gross libel and a contempt of the House, and that stands on the record of the House for all time as a condemnation of the letter and as a vindication by his fellow members of the integrity of the Chairman of the Kitchen Committee.

That is a very severe punishment on the journalist who was guilty of writing the letter and we have heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, North-East (Mr. Coldrick), the Chairman of the Kitchen Committee, that he is prepared to accept the apology. He hinted at the kind of difficulty that might occur if we pursued this matter further, especially after the apology has been tendered.

I do not know whether ever again anyone will be committed by the House to the Tower. I should think it is probably very doubtful, and it is very difficult to see what other punishment could be inflicted after the punishment that was inflicted last night and which has been and will be advertised to the world. I suggest that the apology is adequate and that the House would now best consult its own dignity by not proceeding further with the matter. Therefore, we propose to fix no day for resuming the adjourned debate.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

No day has been fixed for the adjournment of this debate and therefore it cannot be discussed any more. It is a matter between the Leader of the House and hon. Members if no day has been fixed. The matter passes on and the Orders of the Day must be carried on. I distinctly heard the Leader of the House say there was no day for further debate and therefore this debate for the time being cannot be carried on. That is quite definitely my Ruling.

Mr. Sydney Silverman (Nelson and Colne)

On a point of order. The House has listened to a number of speeches in which certain advice has been tendered to the House and certain opinions expressed. Are we to understand there is no opportunity now in which any hon. Member could express his dissent?

Mr. Speaker

Certainly, the hon. Member could put down a Motion on the Order Paper, but no day has been given for the continuation of this debate and therefore tonight it cannot be continued.

Mr. Silverman

Further to that point of order. If there was nothing before the House and no date has been fixed, may I ask what we have been discussing so far and to what point speeches made so far have been addressed?

Mr. Speaker

Any hon. Member can always challenge the Speaker in his conduct, but I have to conduct the affairs of the House as I think best.

Mr. Boothby (Aberdeenshire, East) rose—

Mr. Speaker

I am talking. I made a communication to the House which I thought might be of interest to hon. Members and allowed just a few remarks with regard to it, but now there is no day for subsequent debate and therefore it can only be resumed by a Motion on the Order Paper which any hon. Member can move.

Mr. Bowles (Nuneaton)

Mr. Barkley offered to come to the Bar of the House; is he coming or not?

Mr. Speaker

That was in the letter, but I understood the apology was accepted. [HON. MEMBERS: "No. By whom?"] The hon. Member concerned accepted it.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order, order. I quite understand that the apology was in the letter, but the Home Secretary said that he proposed to fix no day for resuming the adjourned debate.

Mr. Bowles

With great respect, Mr. Barkley offered to come to the House of Commons Bar to apologise to the House, and not to the hon. Member for Bristol, North-East (Mr. Coldrick). I suggest that he has not done so.

Mr. Speaker

Apparently the hon. Member who is aggrieved did not think it was necessary. [Interruption.] In any case, that matter can be debated on a Motion put down on the Order Paper. No day has been signified for the continuation of this debate and, therefore, I rule that it cannot take place.

Mr. Boothby

On a point of order. This House was, in fact, debating a Motion, and I want to ask a perfectly simple question: What has caused you to bring that debate to a conclusion, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker

Nothing has caused me to bring that debate to a conclusion. The Home Secretary has. He said that he would fix no day for resuming the debate.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

The House is really getting somewhat hysterical. As Speaker, may I ask Members to control themselves? I was not here last night, but I understand we had an exhibition. The Home Secretary is responsible for the business of the House, and he has said that no day will be named for the discussion of this business. This business, therefore, can only be discussed on a Motion which can be put down by some hon. Member.

9.52 p.m.

Mr. Eric Fletcher (Islington, East)

In view of the fact that the debate last night was adjourned on the proposal made by my hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr. Messer) and myself, may I with great respect put this to you, Mr. Speaker, and to the Leader of the House? May I remind you, and mention for the benefit of those hon. Members who were not present last night, that the Motion which we were discussing last night was proposed by the Home Secretary and was that Mr. William Barkley shall attend the Bar of the House. May I remind you, with great respect, Mr. Speaker, that the Home Secretary sought at about three o'clock this morning to withdraw that Motion, and that leave to withdraw the Motion was refused? Whereupon, as a result of an intervention which I made to the House, the suggestion was then made by the Home Secretary that it would be much better for the debate to be adjourned and to be continued at some other time.

The point of order I am raising is this. I want to put it to you, Mr. Speaker, and to the Home Secretary that, in view of the proceedings which took place last night, and which will be duly recorded in HANSARD, I think all hon. Members who were present in the House last night would agree that, in view of the conditions in which the debate was adjourned last night, the Home Secretary, as Leader of the House, is in honour bound to find time for a resumption of this debate in the very near future.

Mr. Speaker

That may be, but I am bound by the words of the Home Secretary that no day will be fixed for resuming the debate. The matter between the hon. Member and the Home Secretary must rest there. It is nothing to do with me.

Mr. Bellenger (Bassetlaw)

Further to that point or order. I think, without prejudice to a debate which may possibly ensue later, that it would be as well if you could give the House a little guidance on the procedure which has hitherto been followed tonight. You made a statement and then the Home Secretary made a further statement, or made a speech on your statement. You therefore allowed the debate to ensue. Why must it be cut short after the Home Secretary?

Mr. Speaker

The fact of the matter is that the Home Secretary is Leader of the House and announces the business which is before the House. I am not responsible for that. He made some comments on the letter which I have read out and announced that he would give no day for discussion of this Motion. I am, therefore, bound by that and I am powerless in this matter.

Mr. William Ross (Kilmarnock)

Am I not right in stating, Mr. Speaker, that before you made your statement and read out the letter from Mr. Barkley, the Clerk of the House actually said, "Kitchen Committee Report, resumed debate"?

Mr. Speaker

Yes, but there again somebody has to say "Now." That was never said. Nobody said "Now." I thought it was my duty to read out this letter which seems an apology. It has nothing to do with me whether the House accepts it or no, but various statements were made, and the Chairman of the Kitchen Committee accepted it. The Home Secretary accepted it and said, "No day for further debate as far as this Motion is concerned." As far as I am concerned, that ends the matter.

Mr. S. Silverman

With very great respect, the matter was ended yesterday or early this morning on the basis that the debate was adjourned and would be resumed. It was resumed when the learned Clerk said so at the beginning of this discussion. There has since been a statement by you, a speech on behalf of the Opposition, a speech on behalf of the Kitchen Committee and the hon. Member most personally concerned, and a speech by the Leader of the House. I submit to you, Sir, with all respect, that those speeches were either all completely out of order or all in the resumed debate which has not so far been terminated by the House.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Silverman

I have not yet concluded. I suggest to you further, with great respect, Mr. Speaker, that it is quite wrong to say that because some hon. Member is satisfied or because the Leader of the House is satisfied or because the Leader of the Opposition is satisfied, therefore the House is satisfied. Any offence which was committed here, if there was an offence—as the House has unanimously decided—was not an offence against my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, North-East (Mr. Coldrick) or the right hon. Gentleman opposite or the Leader of the House, but an offence against the House of Commons; and the question whether the apology should be accepted or in what form it should be accepted is a matter for the House to discuss.

Mr. Speaker

That is not a matter for me. The Home Secretary said "No day." I am bound by that.

Mr. Boothby

Further to that point of order. Can we debate the question whether we agree with the Home Secretary or not?

Mr. Speaker

One can put a Motion on the Order Paper. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] That is all one can do at the moment.

Mr. Bowles

I am very sorry to persist, Mr. Speaker, but the basis on which the House to some extent accepted the apology of Mr. Barkley was his offer to come to the Bar of the House and apologise. I have seen no sign of him appearing. Is he coming, or is ten o'clock to pass without him coming to the Bar? What is to happen? Surely he should come.

Mr. Ede

I desire to be of help to the House. When the learned Clerk read the Order, nobody said "Now." [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] It is the duty of the Government to arrange the business of the House, and if a member of the Government says "Now" the matter called then becomes ripe for discussion. The statement that I made was equivalent to one of the Whips saying "No day."