§ 37. Mr. R. Edwardsasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will amend the Act relating to political expenditure for election purposes so as to prevent business undertakings circulating literature for Members of Parliament, the administrative postal casts of which are not included as an election expense.
§ Mr. BrookeThe Representation of the People Act, 1949, already applies to expenditure incurred by or on behalf of a candidate on the issue of advertisements, circulars or publications with a view to promoting his election. I am not aware of any defect in the existing law in this respect, but if the hon. 1389 Member will let me have particulars of what he has in mind I will consider them.
§ Mr. EdwardsIs the Home Secretary aware that I have in my hand a letter signed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Powell) addressed to thousands of new electors in his constituency the postal cost and administration of which was the responsibility of a local firm? The envelope bears the frank of a firm in Wolverhampton, along with an advertisement "Fulwood for tyres". Is this not a hidden political subsidy, and if it is general throughout the country should not such industrial expenditure be included in electoral costs?
§ Mr. BrookeThe hon. Member has not stated what is in this communication, which I have not seen. We are all at liberty to do our work as Members of Parliament, but the law says that if expenditure is incurred with a view to promoting one's election at a future election that has to be included in electoral expenses. It is, of course, for a court to decide whether any particular expenditure is caught by that or not.
§ Miss BaconIs not the right hon. Gentleman aware that, whilst some expenditure may be legal, nevertheless it is making a mockery of the election law if we have a maximum legal amount which candidates can spend and the law can be bent in this way? Does he not realise that at the last General Election a mockery was made of this law by the fact that hundreds of thousands of pounds were spent by business firms throughout this country?
§ Mr. BrookeI cannot accept that, and there is a remedy with the courts, and it must be for a court to determine election law, when there comes down at some point a chopper which decides what is expenditure incurred by somebody or other with a view to promoting his election. Quite obviously I am not in a position to pass any judgment on this particular document which I have not seen.
§ Miss BaconHas the right hon. Gentleman been in touch with the Chan- 1390 cellor of the Exchequer to see whether this expenditure is allowed for business expenses?
§ Mr. BrookeThat, unquestionably, is not a matter for me. Neither my right hon. Friend the Chancellor nor I have seen this document yet.
Mr. Gresham CookeOn a point of order. Is it not the usual practice, Mr. Speaker, to give notice to a right hon. Member whose actions are to be called to account? Would you ask the hon. Member for Bilston (Mr. R. Edwards) whether any such notice was given to the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Powell)?
§ Mr. SpeakerHowever that may be, it raises no point of order for me.
§ Mr. EdwardsIn view of the unsatisfactory reply, I beg leave to raise the matter on the Adjournment.