§ 32. Mr. Tim Rentonasked the Lord President of the Council whether he will move to refer to the Sessional Committee on Procedure the question of the ability of Select Committees to summon Government Ministers to appear before them.
§ Mr. FootNo, Sir. I believe that the present conventions in this matter are well understood and work satisfactorily.
§ Mr. RentonCan the Lord President confirm that a Select Committee has the power to request the presence as a witness of any Member of this House, including any Cabinet Minister, and that, no matter whether he was, in the elegant phrase of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Privy Council Office, a "Whitehall singer" or not, no one—not even the Prime Minister—should interfere with the wishes of a Select Committee summoning and requesting whom it wishes to appear?
§ Mr. FootAs I have said, I believe that the present conventions as they are operated are well understood in the House. If the long-term Select Committee on Procedure wished to look into this matter, it would be within its terms of reference, but it may not wish to do so.
§ Mr. George CunninghamDoes my right hon. Friend remember that two or three weeks ago Mr. Speaker, in an intervention of his own, suggested a certain subject as an appropriate one to be referred to the Sessional Committee on Procedure? Has a motion been brought forward yet to refer that matter? Has my right hon. Friend referred any matter yet to the Sessional Committee on Procedure?
§ Mr. FootNo, we are still considering a number of requests which have been made for references to the Sessional Committee and I hope that we shall be able to deal with that very soon.
§ Mr. Kenneth LewisDoes not the Lord President think that it would be much better if Ministers were encouraged to come before a Select Committee where they could be interrogated on matters discussed in Cabinet and policies could be discussed in Select Committees instead of being leaked?
§ Mr. FootAny suggestion for the general alteration of the present convention should be decided only after consideration by the whole House. If the Select Committee on Procedure wanted to look at it, I am sure that it could do so under the terms of reference that the House has approved.
§ Mr. EnglishDoes my right hon. Friend realise that he is absolutely right? Does he realise that many Select Committees have summoned Ministers? Does he realise that, in the case which I think hon. Members opposite may be thinking about, without due consideration, two weeks before even a polite letter was sent to the Minister, some members of the Committee had leaked the suggestion to the Press that they might, without having decided to, call the Minister? In the circumstances, would my right hon. Friend agree that he is quite right? Any question of calling a Minister would ultimately be decided on the Floor of the House and in this Chamber, and at this 1098 time I think that that would depend on whether it was reasonable.
§ Mr. FootI thought that I was right, but I am happy to have that overwhelming assurance from my hon. Friend.
§ Mr. Hal MillerCan the right hon. Gentleman confirm that, if he were summoned before the Select Committee on Procedure, he would be willing to give evidence on the reasons that led him to bring in the motion last week about setting aside the inspector's report on a compulsory purchase order in his constituency?
§ Mr. FootBefore the hon. Gentleman explodes entirely, perhaps I could gratify him by saying that of course, if the Select Committee on Procedure asked me to appear before it to give evidence on that subject, I should be only too happy to do so. I believe that I am as right on that subject as I was on the one mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, West (Mr. English).