QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE (Hansard, 18 December 1969)

§ Mr. Speaker
The House will remember that yesterday the hon. Member for Berwick and East Lothian (Mr. Mackintosh) raised a question of privilege concerning a report which appeared in The Times of 17th December, 1969. He submitted that it appeared from the report that an attempt had been made to serve a writ on an hon. Member inside the House on a sitting day and that this was either a contempt of the House, or a breach of privilege.
As the House knows, it is not Mr. Speaker's duty to pronounce on whether the action alleged to have occurred did or did not constitute a breach of privilege. All the Chair has to rule is whether the hon. Gentleman, in his submission to the House yesterday, has made out a prima facie case of breach of privilege to the extent that this matter may be given priority over the Orders of the Day.
Accordingly, having studied the precedents involved and the allegation to which the hon. Member drew attention, I have to rule that a prima facie case has been established.
It is now necessary, in accordance with the practice of the House, for a Motion to be moved and then it is for the House to decide what course to follow.

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Fred Pearl)
In view of your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, it falls to me as Leader of the House, in accordance with past practice, to move, That the matter of the complaint be referred to the Committee of Privileges. I think that it would be in the interests of the House as a whole now if we decided that there should be no further debate at this stage.

§ Mr. Michael Foot (Ebbw Vale)
I notified the Leader of the House that I would oppose, or at any rate raise questions about, every proposal to refer a matter to the Committee of Privileges until he had arranged for the House to decide upon the Report of the Select Committee which was established to 1566 examine the whole question. As he knows, we have not yet had an opportunity of doing so.
However, because in this instance, if the facts are correct, it appears to be the clearest possible case of breach of privilege that there could be, and because it is Christmas time, I do not propose to proceed with that opposition. But I should not like the Leader of the House to be under any misapprehension. My determination to resist this procedure in all proper cases will be sustained until he has given the House an opportunity to decide the matter.
I say that all the more because we are still awaiting the report on the last important matter of privilege which was discussed, when I resisted the proposal being made by the Leader of the House, although I did not carry it to a Division—whether I was right or wrong is another question. It is quite wrong that proceedings on privilege should be extended to this degree.
I hope that the Leader of the House, with his responsibilities on the Committee of Privileges, will recognise that the House is determined to have a speedy report on that previous case. Because I am always eager to accommodate the Front Bench on the occasions when it may have a distant claim to be accommodated, on this occasion I shall certainly not advise the House to oppose the Motion. However, I propose to continue opposing or discussing these Motions so as to ensure that the matter is properly settled by the decision of the House.

§ Mr. Peart
I am grateful for the views of my hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Michael Foot). He has made his position quite clear. I can promise him an early debate on this matter. As soon as possible when we return proposals will be put before the House. I always like my hon. Friend in that kind of friendly mood.