HC Deb 24 February 1972 vol 831 cc1508-10
Mr. Speaker

Yesterday the hon. Baronet the Member for Peterborough (Sir Harmar Nicholls) drew attention to a report in The Guardian newspaper which he claimed might constitute a contempt of the House, and, in his view, ought to be brought before the Committee of Privileges. I have now studied the newspaper and taken into account all the surrounding circumstances. It is not for me to say whether or not any contempt of the House was committed. I have to say whether, in my view, the hon. Member's complaint should be given precedence over today's business. It is my opinion that it should not be given such precedence.

Sir Harmar Nicholls

The Leader of the Opposition has explained the strong personal reasons why he could not be in his place at the moment, and this is well understood. I have also made it clear to him that in the event of your Ruling being what it is, Mr. Speaker, there is new evidence which I would want to submit to you for this matter to be looked at further—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I think I can curtail this. Before I made my Ruling I took into account the evidence which I think the hon. Member has privately communicated to me.

Sir Harmar Nicholls

You may not have taken into account, Mr. Speaker, the circumstances in connection with that new evidence. The new evidence is that a statement was issued from the Socialist Party headquarters hours before this statement was made, thus proving that it was premeditated. I would submit that this premeditation raises a new issue. The precedent upon which—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I have ruled on this matter. I have said that I have taken into account all the circumstances. In fact, some time ago—long before the hon. Baronet sent it to my office—I had seen the release and was aware of the circumstances. I have taken account of all these matters, and the hon. Member is not entitled to argue with me about it.

Sir Harmar Nicholls

On a point of order—

Mr. Speaker

Order. There can be no point of order on a decision of mine. I have made my decision. The hon. Member is not entitled to argue with me about it.

Sir Harmar Nicholls

On another point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not the duty of hon. Members who have experience of the House to produce pieces of script which might help the Chair, without in any way differing from the Ruling given by the Chair? The precedent that I want to give in support of the new evidence—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I hope that the hon. Member will be tolerant of me, as I am trying to be tolerant of him. I was fully aware of all the circumstances which he is now trying to bring to the attention of the House. I have considered the precedents. In any case, I doubt whether he is entitled, after I have ruled, to refound his argument. It might be said that he is too late in point of time. I have made my Ruling, and I must now ask the Clerk to read the Orders of the Day.

Sir Frederic Bennett

On another point of order, Mr. Speaker. You have given a Ruling which we all fully accept, but there are at the moment on the Order Paper two or three Motions regarding recent deterioration in parliamentary standards of conduct in this House. Could you indicate to us now whether anything which you have said in your Ruling pre eludes those Motions from being debated in the ordinary way?

Mr. Speaker

The question of business is for the Leader of the House, the Government and the Opposition. When Motions are put on the Order Paper and arguments are advanced for or against them, I will rule on them when I think that anything is out of order.