§ Q1. Sir D. Robertsonasked the Prime Minister if he is aware that the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland 202 was returned to Parliament as an Independent, that he is not eligible to serve on a Standing Committee because he is not a member of the Conservative Party and that he is therefore unable to perform the public duties for which he was returned to Parliament by his constituents; and if he will move to amend the practice and procedure of the House in this regard.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Macmillan)The Committee of Selection, which is responsible for naming Members to serve on Standing Committees, is required by Standing Order No. 58 to have regard to the qualifications of those Members nominated and to the composition of the House. I am afraid that, as the House is at present composed, hon. Members who sit as Independents are less likely to be nominated, having regard to the composition of the House, than Members of one of the major parties.
§ Sir D. RobertsonIs it not apparent that the Prime Minister is not aware of a letter I have received, and which I hold in my hand, from the Chairman of the Selection Committee, wherein he says:
… I recognise your personal qualifications to sit on any Committee dealing with the subject of a Sea Fishing Industry, the fact that you"—and the hon. Member for Banff (Sir W. Duthie) too—have not been eligible on this Committee is not because I have been thwarted by the Whips; it is because you are unfortunately no longer Members of the Conservative Party.
§ Sir D. RobertsonIs not the reply I have received to the Question entirely at variance with the constitution and traditions of the House? [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] Standing Order 58 qualifies me. That is acknowledged by the Chairman of the Selection Committee. My constituency has more fishing ports than any other in Great Britain and more salmon rivers. I am, therefore, qualified on that count. Will not the Prime Minister look at this matter again?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is not, of course, a matter for me; except, naturally, that I will try to consult with the 203 Leader of the House—and, no doubt, with the Opposition—if there is any question of altering the Standing Orders. As I understand the Standing Orders, it is the case—whether they are or are not unfair—that hon. Members of the major parties have a far greater likelihood of being selected by the Committee which has this duty under the Standing Orders.
My right hon. Friend the Leader of the House said, in answering Questions on this subject on 8th February, that if the relevant Standing Order was thought to be unfair he would be glad to have discussions about it at the proper time. I should have thought that this was perhaps a matter for the Select Committee on Procedure which lays down the Standing Orders under which the Committee of Selection has to operate.
§ Mr. LoughlinIs not the Prime Minister aware that on successive occasions attempts have been made to get the Leader of the House to deal with this matter? Is he not also aware that the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir D. Robertson) has a far greater knowledge of this industry than, I would say, any other hon. Member? Further, is he aware that this is a question of the minority rights of hon. Members? Will the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking to have a closer look at this matter to ensure that justice is done?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is not a matter for me; it is a matter for the House as a whole. It is quite clear that, as it works now, the major parties are represented and the Selection Committee, which is representative of all parties, does its work in that way. I am sure that the Selection Committee has done its work as it thought fit, in accordance with the Standing Orders. Whether the Standing Orders should be altered is a matter for the House itself.
§ Mr. P. WilliamsIn view of the fact that the Prime Minister has said that this is a matter for the House as a whole, will he understand that there are some hon. Members, on both sides, who are profoundly disturbed by this decision and who hope that it can be reversed?
§ The Prime MinisterAs I have said, this is not a matter for me. I do not think it would be right to criticise the Selection Committee, which does its duty as it thinks right in accordance with the 204 Standing Orders. If the matter should be changed, then the Standing Orders must be changed.
§ Mr. GrimondWe are grateful to the Prime Minister for saying that he will look at this question. Is he sure that the Standing Order needs amendment? The Standing Order cannot have intended that no Independent in this House could sit on a Committee, whatever qualifications he had, in view of the balance of the parties. The Standing Order specifically speaks of qualifications, and the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir D. Robertson) has high qualifications in this matter. Will the right hon. Gentleman look at this matter afresh, regardless of any amendment to the Standing Order?
§ The Prime MinisterI will consider that with the Leader of the House, but I think it should be recognised that the Committee which serves the House does its duty as it thinks right in accordance with the Standing Orders. It would be much more improper for me to try to interfere with the work of the Selection Committee. But I will, with the Leader of the House, and perhaps with the Leader of the Opposition, consider whether this matter might be referred to the Select Committee on Procedure so that there is a procedure which gives some method of dealing with Independent hon. Members, for wherever they may sit.
§ Mr. GaitskellThe Prime Minister referred to the Select Committee on Procedure. Is there a Select Committee on Procedure in existence? Does the right hon. Gentleman have it in mind to appoint such a Committee? Perhaps he will consider the idea of the appointment of a standing Committee to consider points of procedure as they arise.
§ The Prime MinisterIt has not yet been set up in this Session, although it is a Sessional Committee. I would consider a consultation on this subject informally or, if it was thought fit, to set up this Committee again in order to deal with questions of this kind.
§ Mr. SpeakerI would remind hon. Members that we are dealing with only one Question.
§ Mr. RossOn a point of order. Is it not wrong for the Prime Minister to mislead the House by saying that some change is required when all that matters is that the Select Committee on Procedure should relate the size of the Committee to the interests of the people concerned?
§ Mr. SpeakerI do not think that that can raise any point of order for me.