§ Mr. TylerI gave you notice, Mr. Speaker, this morning that I wished to raise a matter of privilege on a communication I have this morning received from the Glasgow Freelance Branch of the National Union of Journalists, which I consider calls into question my freedom of action as a Member of Parliament. This letter represents an implied threat of disciplinary action against me, as a member of the National Union of Journalists, for the way that I cast my vote on an amendment in the Finance Bill on 19th June.
With your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House I shall read the letter and its enclosure:
Dear Colleague, I have received a complaint against you from one of our members, Mr. George Findlay. A copy is enclosed. Our Branch complaints committee has arranged a hearing of the complaint for 2 p.m. on August 2 at the Trades Union Centre, Carlton Place, Glasgow and in accordance with Rule 18 I am inviting you to attend. I am also sending a copy of the complaint to the secretary of the branch to which you belong, in order that your branch may also be represented.It is signed by the secretary.The enclosure reads as follows:
Dear Colleague, It is laid down in clause one of the Union Code of Professional Conduct that a member should not act against the interests of the Union. I wish to invoke Rule 18 in regard to a breach of this clause by the 467 undernoted members of other branches of the Union.There follows a list which includes my name and the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Dr. Winstanley) and my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Ely (Mr. Freud), among others.In the House of Commons on June 19, 1974, a motion which, if it had been successful, would have been to the financial interest of the trade union movement as a whole and this Union in particular, was before Parliament. As Members of Parliament all the above named members were entitled to vote on this issue and, as members of this Union, had a clear obligation under the Code of Conduct to support the motion. All the members above named in fact voted against the motion which was lost. It is my contention that members of this Union do not become absolved from their obligations, freely undertaken when they apply for membership, when they become members of other organisations, including the House of Commons. The purpose of this complaint is to attempt to ensure that all members of this Union remember and honour the obligations they have undertaken by becoming members and to eliminate any possible suggestion that certain members of the Union, by virtue of holding office totally unconnected with the Union, are relieved of these obligations. I shall be pleased, therefore, if you will take the necessary steps to set up the procedure for dealing with this complaint as laid down in Rule 18.My first reaction, Mr. Speaker, at my breakfast table this morning, was to echo the immortal words of my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale (Mr. Smith)—"Get 468 stuffed"—but there is, clearly, a very important issue at stake here. It is for that reason, Mr. Speaker, that I should be grateful for your ruling on whether you will grant precedence over the Orders of the Day for consideration of this matter.
§ Mr. SpeakerIf the hon. Member is relying upon written documents, will he please bring them to me.
§ Letter and enclosure handed in.
§ Mr. SpeakerI am obliged to the hon. Member for bringing them to me. In accordance with the present practice, I shall rule upon this matter tomorrow.