QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE (Hansard, 12 July 1976)

§ Mr. Adley

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I apologise to my hon. Friend the Member for Ravensbourne (Mr. Hunt) for holding up the start of the debate on his motion on the problems of Greater London, but I wish to raise with you what I consider to be a serious matter of privilege. It arises from a report on page 2 of the Daily Telegraph of today, which says: Six Labour MPs, sponsored by the National Union of Public Employees, have had their political fitness tested by having to write a 1,000-word thesis on trade union power. [Laughter.] This is no laughing matter. The report goes on: The test was devised by the union officials following its decision to increase the number of NUPE sponsored MPs from six to 12. There are, however, 16 aspirants for sponsorship including the six MPs who already enjoy the privilege. The implication is clear, Mr. Speaker—that an hon. Member has to satisfy trade union leaders if he is to meet the criteria of sponsorship laid down by the union concerned.

In certain constituencies, the Labour nomination is totally dependent on trade union sponsorship. The relationship between such a Member and his sponsoring union is totally different from the relationship between another Member and another group or body of people. No one is sponsored by, for example, ICI or Unilever. The words in the report refer to testing "political fitness". I submit that they are a serious reflection upon and a threat to hon. Members' freedom of activity, they are an indication of the power of trade union sponsorship 55 and all that that implies for hon. Members, and they are an abuse of the relationship between an hon. Member and those of his constituents who are not a party to that relationship implied in sponsorship. I ask you, therefore, to consider this matter and to rule upon it in due course.