COMPLAINT OF PRIVILEGE (Hansard, 11 December 1972)

§ Mr. Speaker
I now propose to rule on the question of privilege. As hon. Members know, on Friday last the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Carter), raised as a matter of privilege the question of a writ which he said was served on him within the precincts of this House and which he claimed to be a gross breach of privilege. My duty is now to decide whether to give that matter priority over the Orders of the Day on the ground that it would appear to fall within the ambit of privilege. Having studied the documents and the background to the case, I am so satisfied. Therefore, it would be in order for a motion to be moved.

§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. James Prior)
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. It would, I think, be in the interests of the House as a whole if it were decided that no further debate should take place at this stage.

§ Mr. Harold Wilson
As a member of the Committee of Privileges, I certainly feel that I should not comment on the merits of this matter. But could we be clear about one thing, so that the Select Committee of Privileges is in no way hampered in its work—that your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, referred to the prima facie position of the writ having been served within the precincts of the House, following precedents of which I think many of us are aware? Does not this case also raise the question of the serving of a writ in relation to action taken as a preliminary to proceedings in Parliament, raising the question that, if it had been served even outside the House, the same action would be a question for the Committee of Privileges to consider? I take it that your Ruling and the motion do not preclude the Committee from looking into both aspects of this matter.

§ Mr. Speaker
That would be a matter for the Committee. I have never known 42 it to be limited in its examination by the motion being moved referring a particular topic to it. It is open to the Committee to decide how it tackles the matter and which aspects of it.

§ Mr. C. Pannell
Taking up the point of the Leader of the Opposition, surely your Ruling, as this matter has been referred to the Committee of Privileges, Mr. Speaker, must inhibit or prohibit any persons outside from serving any further writs outside the House in respect of this matter?

§ Mr. Speaker
That is a matter of which I should like notice. I will consider it and, if necessary, rule, but I am not at all certain that it is a matter for me.

§ Mr. Wilson
Although it is not an exact precedent, there has been a case—one affecting myself—which involved a subpoena, which I think is to be found in a footnote in Erskine May. In that case, the House took action to make it clear that the matter could not be proceeded with. I do not know whether it is an exact precedent, but perhaps you would inform the House tomorrow, Mr. Speaker, of your Ruling on the point raised by my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, West (Mr. C. Pannell).

§ Mr. Speaker
Certainly I will look into the matter and do so.

§ Mr. Carter
I wonder whether I could ask the Leader of the House or, through him, the Attorney-General, three questions. I should like to do this, because it may take the Committee of Privileges two months or more to rule on this matter —[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Hon. Members say, "No", but it is possible: the Christmas Recess is before us. I am at present in considerable doubt as to precisely what I should do so far as the substance of the case is concerned—namely that of the St. Christopher Motorists Association.
My three questions are these. First, arising out of the writ itself and the way in which it was issued, as it may have been improperly issued to me, how does this affect the way in which the writ was issued and any future conduct of mine so far as the company is concerned? Am I inhibited either in this House or outside in my public responsibilities in this matter?
43 Second, so far as the matter now going to the Committee of Privileges is concerned, does this inhibit me in any way?
Third, another copy of the writ was posted to me three hours after I was issued in the Central Lobby with the first writ. I received it 24 hours after receiving the first one, principally because it was incorrectly addressed. It was addressed to a neighbour and I got it only because she was kind and honest enough to come along and give it to me.
In order to remove any fears and apprehension that I might have, would the Leader of the House clear up those three points, because there is a lot that I should like to do in the next few weeks to carry out my responsibilities as a Member of Parliament with particular reference to the dossier which is the heart of this case?

§ Mr. Prior
Could I advise the House that, since these matters are extremely complicated, it would be wise for the House to await your ruling on the point raised by the right hon. Gentleman a short time ago, and perhaps you would consider at the same time, Mr. Speaker, the points now raised by the hon. Gentleman before you give your ruling on these matters tomorrow. His first point is a matter for the Committee of Privileges to consider during the course of its discussion.

§ Mr. Speaker
I shall certainly consider the points raised if they are for me.
I would respectfully suggest that if this motion is passed the Committee of Privileges might meet as quickly as possible and speedily dispose of the matter.