HC Deb 15 March 1961 vol 636 cc1419-21
Mr. Charles Pannell (Leeds, West)

I gave you notice, Mr. Speaker, that I wished to raise a point of order about something you said yesterday, when you ruled on the question raised about Standing Order No. 95A.

The part I am quoting from is the ultimate paragraph of the first Ruling you made, which appears in column 1202. I do not think that this paragraph in the OFFICIAL REPORT quite accurately reports what you said. To make myself perfectly clear, I should say that I have taken this matter up with the editor of the OFFICIAL REPORT. The passage reads: I cannot find, within the rules of order, an equivalent obligation for them "— that is, the Government— to find time for what is, although in the names of the Leader of the Opposition and other hon. Members, a private Member's Motion…''—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 14th March, 1961; Vol. 636, c. 1202.] I took up the point almost immediately after the debate and went into the Library to check, but I think that you interposed some words to the effect that the Leader of the Opposition, although a very important Member, is a private Member. I was interested in that. I am fairly sure that my hearing was right. I did not raise it yesterday, because I wanted to check the authorities on it. If it means anything at all it means that you were suggesting, in this context, that the Leader of the Opposition is a private Member. I do not think that he is and I am reinforced in that belief by certain Rulings.

The Leader of the Opposition is certainly not a private Member in relation to asking Questions in the House and he never does ask a normal Parliamentary Question. By tradition, he is precluded from that and two Speakers who preceded you have upheld the view that he is a different kind of person. I have looked right through the debates in 1937, when a salary was granted to the Leader of the Opposition and his position was recognised in this House. He cannot be a private Member and it was particularly to defend the rights of the Opposition and to create a place here for the Leader of the Opposition that that was done.

If you read the original debates you will see that an Amendment was moved because it was suggested that he might become the lackey of the Establishment, but that was not the suggestion of Sir John Simon. who underlined that the Leader of the Opposition is not a private Member.

Consequently, I am making the point, without going too deeply into the authorities, that anything which comes from the Leader of the Opposition is not the same as anything coming from a private Member, but must have special weight given to it, and it does not lend itself to the abuse and contempt of the Opposition such as we had from the Government yesterday.

Mr. Speaker

I was very glad that when the hon. Member for Leeds, West (Mr. C. Pannell) wrote to me he said he was quite certain that the words in the context in which they were used by me did not suggest any sort of disrespect for the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition or his office. They clearly did not. It would be monstrous to suggest it.

My own recollection—I had been for a long time in the Chair and had had many points of order put to me at that time—coincides with that of the hon. Member, that I did say words of the kind that he has suggested, that the Leader of the Opposition is a very important person, in order to make it clear to everyone concerned that I was not speaking with disrespect of him. I do not speak about this particular right hon. Gentleman, but of the whole office of the Leader of the Opposition. He is a very particular person, having all kinds of peculiar characteristics and privileges, including a salary, and matters of that kind.

In other contexts, of course, he would have to be treated as a special person, but, if the House or the hon. Member cares to look at it, I think that it is perfectly plain what I was doing. I was really pointing out that there are only two kinds of business which come before the House in that context. One is Government business and the other is business raised by private Members in the sense of unofficial Members.

In the context in which I was speaking I believe that my words were quite appropriate and accurate and, although I appreciate greatly the assistance which the hon. Member always gives me, I am quite impenitent about having used them. I believe that they were right and appropriate. I accept every precedent to which the hon. Member has referred and have no doubt that they were completely appropriate to the circumstances to which they applied, and I would myself seek to follow them.