§ Mr. Arthur LewisOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wish to raise with you a matter which I was hoping to put to the Leader of the House in a business question. However, I think that it is a point that you might consider, because 832 it concerns a vital matter affecting all Members of this House. I think that it is within your province to deal with the matter that I am about to raise, since the Leader of the House, while promising to deal with it and no doubt doing his best, has not dealt with it.
My point concerns the way in which Ministers and Ministerial Departments are taking away the rights of Members of this House. Almost every day one reads obviously inspired Press leaks about various proposals of the Government. Almost invariably, the leaks are on matters giving a build-up for the Government on what they consider to be good political subjects. I could quote dozens of instances. However, I will confine myself to today's examples.
In the Press today there are three statements. The first is to the effect that action will be taken to prevent strikers making claims for income tax rebate, which is their right. The second says that action will be taken to cut out welfare benefits to strikers. These are two popular subjects in the country at present. The third statement says that there will be a White Paper issued in the near future on cuts in Government expenditure. In the latter instance, there are even details about the sums involved—and the information in this case was given not to Britishers but to the American Chamber of Commerce.
What normally happens is that Questions on these subjects are put down to the Ministers concerned, they make statements, the time of the House is taken up, and many hon. Members are precluded from raising points and discussing issues which have already been given full publicity by the Departments of the Ministers concerned. That is fairly obvious, otherwise the Press could not get the information.
Today we have seen another example. It has resulted in a Private Notice Question which, as you have pointed out, has occupied 25 minutes of our time. Yet even before the prepared answer was given in this House, full details of the Government's proposals had appeared in the Press a week ago.
If I want to ask a Private Notice Question on a matter which requires immediate attention and which is not likely to be dealt with, I am refused an 833 answer, whereas Private Notice Questions are answered on matters about which the Government have already given statements to the Press. This happens every day of the week.
I suggest to the Leader of the House that he should see to it that Ministers and Ministerial Departments cease this practice and realise that statements should be given to this House first, as the right hon. Gentleman has promised, and that he should tell his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer that, if he has a statement to make about cuts in Government expenditure, he should come here to do it. Failing that, Mr. Speaker, I ask you to take action in order to protect the rights of hon. Members.
Mr. Bob BrownFurther to that point of order. The Minister of Agriculture recently made a statement about a change of policy. Prior to his statement in the House, there were Press leaks, and the right hon. Gentleman undertook to investigate whether they had come from anyone in his Department. In a Written Answer yesterday, the right hon. Gentleman said that he had undertaken the enquiry that he offered to make and that he was satisfied that no member of the staff of his Department was responsible for the leak and what had happened was that consultations had to take place with organisations outside the House during the weeks prior to his statement, over which he had no control.
I suggest that it is remarkable that no leak ever occurs in a single newspaper. It always appears in more than one of our national papers. When it happens, it is recognised by every hon. Member that it is a Departmentally-inspired leak.
It is not good enough for the Minister of Agriculture to lie back on his staff and say that he is satisfied that no member of his staff was responsible. If a member of his staff was responsible for leaking this information on the basis of an instruction from the right hon. Gentleman or one of his junior Ministers, the Minister himself must bear responsibility and act accordingly in this House.
§ Mr. James JohnsonFurther to that point of order——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. If the hon. Member's further points relate in any way to what have been described as leaks 834 inspired by Ministerial action, I cannot accept them. They are not matters for the Chair. The House makes its own rules and, if it is the wish of the House that hon. Members should be able to put to the Chair complaints about actions by Ministers or Ministerial Departments, the rules of order must be changed. Under the present rules of order, such complaints to the Chair are not permissible. They are not matters for the Chair.
The hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) was kind enough to give me notice that he would seek to raise the point about my acceptance of Private Notice Questions. That again is a matter on which there can be no point of order. It is a matter for the Chair. It is not an easy decision. What happened today showed, I think, that my selection of the Question was justified. Clearly it was a subject in which the House was interested. This is a matter for the Chair, and the Chair will continue to do its best, bearing in mind what the hon. Member has said.
§ Mr. Arthur LewisI am very much obliged to you, Mr. Speaker, for your remarks. My criticism was in no way directed against the Chair. I appreciate the Chair's difficulties. What I was trying to explain, and what I think, with respect, is within the prerogative of the Chair is this. I know that you have sole right to decide whether either a Private Notice Question is asked or a Ministerial statement is made, because your permission is sought.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Let me correct that at once. I have no power to prevent as many Ministers making statements as want to make them.
§ Mr. Arthur LewisThen now you go further on this, Mr. Speaker. What I am trying to say is that if the Government issue Press statement—and that is what they are doing—to build up a good Press report. and then make statements on the very thing they have published, they are then abusing the rights of hon. Members I ask you, therefore, to stop the Government abusing those rights
§ Mr. WhitelawFurther to that point of order. It may help the House to get on if I give an answer at this stage. As all right hon. and hon. Gentlemen who have been in government know, 835 Governments frequently find that, much against their will and much as they dislike it, information gets out before they want it to. This has happened over the years to all Governments. I dislike it as much as anyone, and perhaps because I am Leader of the House more than anyone. No one is more anxious than I am to ensure that the House gets the information first, and I shall do everything I can to that end. It is a problem that all Governments have faced. I realise how difficult it is and how much it annoys the House. I shall certainly do my best to stop it.
§ Mr. James JohnsonOn a point of order. Mr. Speaker. What defence have I when the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food sincerely but shamelessly admits to a leak by his Department and then does nothing more about it? I appeal to the Leader of the House to discipline his Minister.
§ Mr. WhitelawThe hon. Gentleman cannot expect me to discipline anybody. That is well beyond my powers, as I very quickly learned. All that I can say is that I shall do my absolute best to make sure that these things do not occur. They do happen. They happen with all Governments, and it is a difficult problem.