HC Deb 09 July 1965 vol 715 cc1990-5
Mr. Maudling

On a point of order. Mr. Speaker. May I seek your guidance? As you are aware, I sought to put down a Private Notice Question to the Prime Minister, which I believed was in order, about a matter of considerable urgency and importance, namely, whether the Foreign Office official adviser is being allowed to accompany—

Mr. Speaker

Order. It is not in order to repeat the terms of an attempted Private Notice Question which has not been allowed.

Mr. Maudling

Without attempting to repeat its terms, Mr. Speaker—I think that the substance is well known—may I ask, in the light of your earlier guidance this morning, whether the Prime Minister offered to make a statement on this matter and, if not, what else I can do about it?

Mr. Speaker

The Prime Minister has not, to my knowledge, offered to make a statement. I do not think that I can give the right hon. Gentleman guidance in any direction on matters of which he is not himself fully aware. I should gladly offer my advice if I could. I do not know what can be done.

Mr. Iain Macleod

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Are you aware that the particular question of the position and status of this man reflects directly on the good faith of the Prime Minister in his statement yesterday to the House of Commons? If Questions on this are disallowed, may we have an assurance that you do not regard it as part of the function of the Chair to protect the Government from proper questioning by the House of Commons?

Mr. Speaker

The right hon. Gentleman must make it quite plain that he is not seeking to cast any reflection upon the impartiality of the Chair. [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw."] Order. He would be perfectly entitled to do that, but not by way of a question to the Chair. It would require a substantive Motion. I must, therefore, ask him to make clear that that was not his intention.

Mr. William Yates

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask whether you have in fact received a request from the Foreign Secretary to make a statement during the course of the debate—

Mr. Speaker

I have received no such request.

Mr. Yates

Further to that point of order—I had not completed my point of order, may I ask whether it is within the rules of the House for us to move the Adjournment of the House? [HON. MEMBERS: "No."]

Mr. Speaker

The House is, with due respect to it, very difficult. I wish it would behave. The hon. Gentleman is addressing me on some point of order.

Mr. Yates

If the Government side would be patient for a moment, under the Standing Orders of the House, if a matter comes to our attention which is of great public importance, namely, that we think the House of Commons was misled by the Prime Minister yesterday, are we not entitled to move the Adjournment of the House?

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman does not have power to move that.

An Hon. Member

On a Friday?

The Attorney-General (Sir Elwyn Jones)

The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Enfield, West (Mr. Iain Macleod) made what to hon. Members on this side seemed to be a direct reflection upon the impartiality of the Chair. You, Mr. Speaker, invited the right hon. Gentleman to consider the position he had created by reason of that grossly unparliamentary misconduct and invited him to withdraw. I now invite him to consider his position and the dignity and protection of the Chair.

Hon. Members

Withdraw.

Mr. Speaker

Order. I invited the right hon. Gentleman to make it clear that that was not what he was doing, and he has not accepted the invitation. I hope that he will, because it may create difficulties if he does not.

Mr. Iain Macleod

I used words in an invitation to you, Mr. Speaker, to make clear to the House the duties of the Chair. I take that to be in order; it has always been taken to be in order. If you think there is some implication behind those words, I withdraw the implication.

Mr. Speaker

I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for making it quite clear that he withdraws an implication, if it were there. The answer is that the Chair is utterly and absolutely impartial in exercising its duty to consider whether or not to allow a Private Notice Question. It is totally impartial between parties and persons and everyone else.

Mr. William Yates

This is a very important point of order on a Friday morning. Do I understand from your Ruling that it is not possible at a Friday sitting to move Standing Order No. 9 and that back benchers have, for some reason which is unknown to me, lost one of the most important rights to curb the Executive by moving Standing Order No. 9 on a Friday? If this is correct, then I hope that those who are serving on the Committee considering the procedure of the House make quite certain that back benchers' rights to move Standing Order No. 9 shall at no time be blocked by the Executive on a Friday morning or in a case where the Chair, using its discretion, decides not to allow a question by Private Notice.

Mr. Speaker

That is governed by Standing Order. The hon. Gentleman keeps talking about Standing Order No. 9, which apparently is the relevant Order to what he is saying. It says in terms that it does not apply to Fridays.

Mr. Lipton

On a point of order. Reverting to an issue which was raised previously this morning, will you please make it quite clear that no hon. Member, however exalted he may think he is, has an absolute right to demand that any Private Notice Question he thinks fit to put must automatically be accepted?

Mr. Speaker

Of course the House knows all about this. Sometimes the decisions that the Chair has to take are very difficult, but it has to take them, and it rests on the Chair to decide whether or no any particular question should be allowed.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

While fully accepting that it is not possible to make use of Standing Order No. 9 as it happens to be a Friday, is it not the case that we are placed in an intolerable position? Is it entirely right that the House should not have a proper statement from the Minister responsible and, although I think I did hear you say that you had received no request from the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to make a statement, would it not be best, in the interests of the reputation of the House, that the Foreign Secretary should now be asked to come down and make a statement?

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman keeps putting a whole lot of points which do not give rise to matters on which the Chair can make observations, and the House would not wish it to do so. It would then not be being impartial.

Mr. Kershaw

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Whilst realising, as it is a Friday, that Standing Order No. 9 cannot be used, is it not correct that the Government can at any time propose the Adjournment of the House? In accordance with tradition and the honour which the Government have, in view of the statement which was made yesterday, should hey not now seek an opportunity to clarify the situation and see whether they have misled the House?

Mr. Speaker

The first part of the hon. Gentleman's point of order is a point of order, and the answer is, Yes. The rest comes into the category I have just been describing. It does not raise a matter for the Chair and about which it would be right for the Chair to express a view.

Sir J. Langford-Holt

Whether or not it is under Standing Order No. 9, could you clear up two points? Firstly, do we understand that there is no method on a Friday by which hon. Members can raise matters of urgent public importance? Secondly, can we be assured that if it is impossible, the raising of such a matter next Monday will not be prejudiced by virtue of the fact that it has not been raised today?

Mr. Speaker

Should it be raised on Monday, it would be considered on its merits on Monday. It would represent, in the circumstances, the first opportunity of dealing with the matter on Standing Order No. 9, because no No. 9 opportunity occurs on a Friday. That rounds off the point the hon. Member was on.

Sir Rolf Dudley Williams

I think hon. Members on both sides of the House would like to have the matter ventilated today. I put this question to you with great diffidence. I wonder whether it would be possible for you, at your discretion, if it were the general will of the House, to suspend the sitting of the House for, say, 30 minutes to give the Prime Minister or the Foreign Secretary an opportunity to come to the House and make a statement?

Mr. Speaker

It is not a course which I should think it proper to take.

Mr. Peter Walker

In view of the fact that it has been alleged that the Prime Minister misled the House yesterday, would it be in order for the Prime Minister to come and make a statement at 4 o'clock on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House?

Mr. Speaker

In so far as it is a matter of order, yes; but I would make no observation on that.

Mr. Palmer

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. What exactly is the business before the House at the moment?

Hon. Members

Let us get on with it.

Mr. Speaker

At present I am being asked a number of questions of points of order which it is my duty to hear, until I hear the lack of value of what is being said, or its value. But I hope that we can soon get on to the Orders of the Day.

Mr. Maudling

As this point of order arose from my seeking your guidance, Mr. Speaker, am I right in now understanding that there are two possibilities, either that the Prime Minister would himself decide at some time in the course of today to come to the House and make a statement, which he would be able to do if he wished, or that we could put down a Motion?

Mr. Speaker

Certainly. But this is our old trouble. The Prime Minister would not be able to come in and do anything about it in the middle of an Order of the Day.

Mr. Maudling

Could the Prime Minister come here and make a statement at 4 o'clock?

Mr. Speaker

Yes. That is a different matter. I am only tidying by that qualification what otherwise might have sounded like a loose statement.

Mr. Webster

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. As the Prime Minister intervened at 11 o'clock to announce the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' intervention on this subject, would it not be in order for him at the termination of one of the debates on one of the Measures before the House to intervene and make a statement in order to clarify the Government's position?

Mr. Speaker

I do not know why the House keeps getting it wrong. It is all common form. The Government of the day can move the Adjournment of the House at any moment between Orders of the Day, but they cannot do so in the middle of one of them. That is the only point about it.

Sir Knox Cunningham

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I have your guidance? Is it within your powers generally to suspend the sitting of the House, or can you suspend a sitting only if there is disorder?

Mr. Speaker

I can suspend a sitting if I think it right to do so; that is to say, if there is disorder, or, as I have done, because somebody is taken ill and we want a moment to deal with the incident. There are moments of that kind. I hope that the House will now get on to the Orders of the Day.

Mr. Maudling

I am sorry to intervene again, Mr. Speaker, but as we now have the Leader of the House with us, may I point out to him the strong desire expressed by the House—[Interruption]—for some form of statement by the Prime Minister—[Interruption]—and ask whether he will convey this desire urgently to the Prime Minister?

Hon. Members

Answer.

The Lord President of the Council (Mr. Herbert Bowden)

I am quite prepared to discuss this with my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.