HC Deb 03 March 1959 vol 601 cc208-12
Sir L. Ungoed-Thomas

On a point of order. I submitted to you, Mr. Speaker, a Private Notice Question—

Mr. Speaker

I have ruled that for an hon. Member whose Question has been refused to read it out to the House is an abuse of the rules of the House, because he gets his Question before the House on a point of order.

Sir L. Ungoed-Thomas

I was merely going to ask whether you would be so good, Mr. Speaker, as to state why the Question, of which I gave you Private Notice, has been rejected by you?

Mr. Speaker

I remember the hon. and learned Member's Question. He asked about the hon. Member for Wednesbury (Mr. Stonehouse) and what had happened to him. I would preface anything that I say by reminding the House that I am as much bound as is any hon. Member by the rules on Questions. When considering a Private Notice Question, I have to see whether it conforms to the general rules on Questions. One of the most important is that the Question relates to the Departmental responsibilities of Ministers.

Yesterday, in the exchanges that took place, it was made clear that in the Government's view, and on the documents as I was able to understand them, the matter of immigration and the making of an order that the hon. Member for Wednesbury was a prohibited immigrant was entirely a Federal responsibility, on which the Federation was not obliged to consult Her Majesty's Ministers here in the United Kingdom at all. Therefore, I was bound to rule that the hon. and learned Member's Question was not in order, as being deficient in the responsibility of a Minister.

Sir L. Ungoed-Thomas

In view of your Ruling yesterday, Mr. Speaker, on the facts as they existed yesterday, I would not, of course, have sought to trouble you further today, but the position now is that a deportation order has been made and carried out, and the information on the tape is that the Northern Rhodesia Government agreed to the action taken and there is a report in a newspaper, from a correspondent in Lusaka, that the Northern Rhodesian police were also there to support Federal officers, if necessary, but were not called upon to do so. It looks, in that case, as if the Colonial Secretary is aware of it and has responsibility for it, and it was in those circumstances that I sought to put my Question.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. and learned Member has produced a lot of facts of which I do not know, but the Question which he put to me, and put in at the very last minute—in fact, it was not submitted in writing until after 12 o'clock—seemed to me to be a matter entirely of the responsibility of the Federal Ministers. The hon. and learned Member may take a different view of the law on the subject from the view I take, but I understand that there is to be a debate on this subject tomorrow, when all that can be gone into.

Mr. Gaitskell

It is surely not necessary for an hon. Member, or a right hon. Member, who submits a Private Notice Question to you, Mr. Speaker, to give you a full account of all the facts which have been published in the newspapers. It is reasonable to assume that, naturally, you would ascertain what had taken place. My hon. and learned Friend the Member far Leicester, North-East (Sir L. Ungoed-Thomas) has made it plain that, according to the reports received from Lusaka, not only were the Government of Northern Rhodesia aware of this but also apparently concurred in this action.

With great respect, whatever personal views there may be about my hon. Friend the Member for Wednesbury (Mr. Stone-house), it is surely the duty of the House to consider very seriously a situation in which Her Majesty's Government have some share of responsibility for deporting an hon. Member from a Colonial Territory.

Mr. Speaker

As I understood the matter, and still understand it, the hon. Member for Wednesbury has been removed from the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland by virtue of an order declaring him to be a prohibited immigrant. That order was made by the Federation authorities, for whom this Government in that sphere has no responsibility. I understand that the hon. Member was transferred from Lusaka which is in Northern Rhodesia and, by virtue of that order, the action of removing him was entirely that of the Federal Government and nobody else.

The action which the hon. and learned Member for Leicester, North-East (Sir L. Ungoed-Thomas) says was taken by the local police in assisting there was, I presume, under the orders of the Federal Government, because it is the Federal Government who made the order declaring the hon. Member for Wednesbury a prohibited immigrant.

Sir L. Ungoed-Thomas

Further to that point of order. I must have put the matter a little confusedly, Mr. Speaker. The report is that the Government of Northern Rhodesia agreed to the action taken. If they agreed to the action taken, then the Colonial Secretary here is answerable for that action.

Mr. Speaker

If the hon. and learned Member's Question to me had been whether, in view of the fact that the Northern Rhodesian Government had agreed to this, he could put a Private Notice Question, that would have been a different matter, but that was not the Question that reached me.

Mr. Gaitskell

This is a very grave matter. An hon. Member of the House has been arrested and deported from a British Colonial Territory and I would hope that the whole House would consider this as a serious matter.

We fully understand that, as the situation was yesterday, the order had been made by the Federal Government and, although there was some disagreement about their rights in this matter, nevertheless you, Mr. Speaker, took the view, and we have to accept it, that you could not accept a Motion for the Adjournment of the House on those grounds. But now we have two particular reports, first, that the Government of Northern Rhodesia agreed to this and, secondly, that the police of Northern Rhodesia, in Northern Rhodesia, indirectly under the control of the Colonial Secretary, took some part in the act of deporting an hon. Member of this House.

I submit to you that it was reasonable that a Question on this matter should have been accepted so that the Colonial Secretary could have given some explanation.

Mr. Speaker

If the Question had been confined to a matter which included only the responsibility of the Northern Rhodesia police, and if I had been satisfied that the Northern Rhodesia police were on this occasion acting under the orders of the Colonial Secretary, or that the Colonial Secretary was responsible for their action there, it would have been a different story, but that was not the Question as it came to me. I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman, also, that this is a matter which I understand—and as soon as I can I shall call the Lord Privy Seal to make a statement on tomorrow's business—which can be fully debated tomorrow. We must not debate it now.

Mr. J. Hynd

May I seek your guidance, Mr. Speaker, on procedure? Your Ruling was based on the responsibility of the Federal Government, but is it not the case that frequently over the years, and even up to a few days ago, Questions have been put to Her Majesty's Government about the arrest, deportation or expulsion of British subjects whether in Russia, or Egypt, or anywhere else in the world, and that it has been the practice of the House that Her Majesty's Government are responsible for making inquiries on these matters, even if they are entirely within the jurisdiction of the countries concerned? Are we not entitled, therefore, to ask questions on a matter more directly under the jurisdiction of Her Majesty's Government?

Mr. Speaker

The question which the hon. Member raises assumes that the hon. Member for Wednesbury is under arrest. I have made inquiries about that, and I find that he is not. He has been transferred to another part, to Dar-es-Salaam, where he is perfectly free to do what he likes—to come back to this House, if he wants to.

Mr. Benn

On a point of order. I wish to raise a complaint of breach of Privilege concerning the hon. Member for Wednesbury, and—

Mr. Speaker

If the hon. Member will await the proper time, I will call him to make his point on privilege.

Sir L. Ungoed-Thomas

Further to the original point of order. All I was seeking to get was a statement from the Colonial Secretary on the deportation. The deportation means that somebody has pushed the hon. Member for Wednesbury out of Northern Rhodesia. That has been done with the co-operation of the local Northern Rhodesian forces, and with the approval of the Northern Rhodesian Government.

For that, the Colonial Secretary is responsible, and all we are asking is that a statement about that should be made by the Colonial Secretary in this House as an urgent matter of public importance. All we are asking is for a factual statement, and the fact that there is to be a debate tomorrow, in my respectful submission, does not touch it at all. What we want to have is factual information upon which we can base our debate.

Mr. Speaker

I am afraid that that does not alter my decision. As I said before, the Question as submitted to me related entirely to the responsibility of the Federation Government, and not anybody else.