§ Mr. Maurice MacmillanMay I seek your guidance, Mr. Speaker, on another matter which may be one of breach of privilege?
In The Guardian today there appears a report of the Patronage Secretary referring to the proceedings of the Select Committee on Wealth Tax and a vote taken therein.
Perhaps I should tell you and the House, Mr. Speaker, that I have tried without success to contact the Chairman of the Select Committee—the right hon. Member for Battersea, North (Mr. Jay)—because I and, I think, all other members of the Select Committee were led to believe before we finished our proceedings late last night or in the early hours of this morning that all the proceedings were privileged, including any reports which might have been made to the Select Committee, any voting which might have taken place, and any discussion which might have taken place. until such time as the Report was published.
I have since been informed that these matters are to be considered privileged until such time as the Report is laid and that any reference to them after that could be a matter of discourtesy to the House but could not be one of Privilege.
As our proceedings in the Select Committee continued for some little time after the vote referred to in the report in The Guardian was taken, and as indeed we 1549 did not rise until about midnight, any question of Privilege which might arise would depend upon when it is alleged that the Patronage Secretary made the statement which is quoted in The Guardian. I seek your guidance, Mr. Speaker, as to what is the present status of the proceedings of the Select Committee, reports which may or may not have been made to it and which it may or may not have voted down, and the details of voting and the details of proceedings.
As the members of the Select Committee were warned that we must not discuss those matters even with our senior colleagues, it would be helpful if you would give us your guidance, Mr. Speaker, as to what our correct line of conduct now is.
§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Robert Mellish)In the early hours of the morning I was approached by the Press. I said that I had not any knowledge of the decisions or of the deliberations of the Select Committee to which the right hon. Member for Farnham (Mr. Macmillan) has referred. The member of the Press said that he understood that the Select Committee had rejected proposals for a wealth tax, to which I said I had no knowledge of this whatsoever. However, I said to the representative of the Press—we shall read all this later—"If that is the position, two Members of my party were absent from that Committee. They are on Commonwealth Parliamentary Association business. They were unpaired. Any decisions taken by the Select Committee would obviously have been taken by those who were in the majority but who, in my view, had no right to be in the majority."
§ Mr. SpeakerThe Chair is put in a slightly difficult position through this matter being raised without the Chair having had the chance of ascertaining precisely what the facts are. However, as I understand it, the Report was laid during yesterday's sitting. Therefore, I think that no question of Privilege can arise, though it is a matter of courtesy that we do not comment upon such Reports until they have been published and all hon. Members are equally able to discuss them.
§ Mr. Peter ReesFurther to the point 1550 raised by my right hon. Friend the Member for Farnham (Mr. Macmillan), may I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that it might be a matter for the Committee of Privileges to determine how and at what time the newspaper in question or the journalist who contacted the Patronage Secretary discovered, if indeed it was the fact—obviously it would be a breach of Privilege for me as a member of the Select Committee to discuss what happened—that the report of the Chairman was rejected by the Committee?
§ Mr. SpeakerThis is, one hopes, the last day of this Session. I am not prepared to say off the cuff whether it is right for me to say that I shall rule next Session on a matter that has been raised this Session. If—I repeat "if"—I think that it is necessary, I may say something further about the matter today.
§ Mr. MacmillanI think I made it clear, Mr. Speaker—at any rate. I hope I did—that I was not suggesting that a breach of Privilege had been committed by the Patronage Secretary. I merely suggested that, if there had been a breach of Privilege, there seems to be some conflict in the attitude taken as to the status of the Report.