§ Mr. SpeakerI have now to rule on a matter of privilege. Last Friday, the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) raised a question of privilege involving the Attorney-General. I have considered carefully the material submitted and whether these matters fall within the ambit of privilege. I now rule that privilege is not involved, and in consequence the subject cannot be given priority over the Orders of the Day. However, the hon. Member is of course entitled to raise the matter in any other parliamentary way which may be open to him. But since no matter of privilege appears to arise, the matter cannot be pursued at this time.
§ Mr. Arthur LewisI thank you for your remarks, Mr. Speaker. However, you will recollect that I raised the question not only as privilege but as a possible contempt of Parliament. With great respect, you have not mentioned the possibility of contempt, which I should have thought was the main issue to be considered.
On the question of privilege, you referred last Friday to a somewhat similar case raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton) with the Committee of Privileges, but in that instance you said that there was no proof that leaks had been made or, if they had been made, that it had been done by or with the knowledge and consent of either Ministers or members of the Committee.
In this case, you will recollect, the Attorney-General has admitted in writing that it was he who was responsible for instructing his secretary to issue statements to the Press answering questions which were due on the Order Paper on the following Monday. If that is to be the position, it means that, at any time, a Minister may, in the knowledge that Questions are pending, issue Press statements answering those Questions and thus pre-empt the rights of hon. Members to ask their Questions in the House.
That, I suggest, is a contempt of Parliament. May I ask you to look at this aspect, which you have not, with great respect, touched on in your answer?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Member is not quite correct. The phrase I used, "within the ambit of privilege", includes contempt. I have considered the matter carefully. I am not pronouncing at all on the merits of the practice, as to whether it is desirable—I am not saying that it happened in this case—that a Minister should announce publicly beforehand what his answer will be. But I am satisfied that no question of privilege is involved. It is a matter of parliamentary practice. The hon. Member can pursue it in other ways, but it does not, I am satisfied and I so rule, come within the ambit of privilege, which includes contempt.
§ Mr. Arthur LewisMay I again thank you, Mr. Speaker? In view of what you have said, with your kind help and assistance, I will raise the issue on Wednesday evening during the Adjournment debate which you have kindly allocated to me. I will then deal with this subject.