§ Q2 Mr. Blakerasked the Prime Minister (1) how many peers may not have their telephones tapped on the authority of a Secretary of State as a result of his 1964 ruling;
(2) what instructions he has given regarding the cancellation of any authority for the tapping of telephones of Members of either House of Parliament when the individual concerned takes his seat or accepts the writ of summons.
§ The Prime MinisterI would refer the hon. Member to the Answer I gave to a Question by the hon. Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow) on 11th April.—[Vol. 744, c. 965.]
§ Mr. BlakerIs not one of the results of the decision when the Prime Minister has taken on this subject that if a peer is engaged in nefarious activities all he has to do to protect himself is to accept a writ of summons? Is not the Prime Minister's reluctance to answers further questions on this subject the result of his recognition that in that and other ways his decision has caused great anomalies?
§ The Prime MinisterI am shocked to think that any hon. Member in this House would cast such a reflection on the Members of another place, or indeed of this House. The reason why I am not answering further questions, as I said last week, is that it was exceptional to make the statement that I did, and I do not believe that it is right to go on answering further questions. The particular point about nefarious activities was dealt with in answer to a supplementary question put to me when I made the original statement.