HC Deb 16 November 1976 vol 919 cc1118-26
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Michael Foot)

With permission, Mr. Speaker, I will make a statement about the lobby tomorrow.

Members will be aware that tomorrow more than 30,000 people may take part in a mass lobby of the House of Commons.

To lobby one's Member of Parliament is a fundamental right of the people of this country. However, if we are to maintain this right as a reality, special efforts have to be made by everyone on occasions such as tomorrow's to enable as many people as possible to have access to their Members, and I therefore appeal to all Members for their support and close co-operation.

The usual arrangements for such lobbies will be in operation tomorrow. These have been decided by the Services Committee, which has given much consideration to this matter during the past few years. The aim is to let as many lobbyists as possible into the Precincts to meet their Members. But to do this it is essential to keep a steady flow of lobbyists to the Central Lobby and to the Grand Committee Room where they will be able to talk with Members, and to make sure, as far as possible, that there is no interruption to this flow.

By these means we shall get the maximum number in, but I am afraid that at the same time we must recognise that we cannot hope to get everyone into the Palace. Indeed, I doubt whether it will be physically possible to get more than 3,000 in during the course of the afternoon, and that means that, with the best will in the world, there are bound to be large numbers of disappointed people.

Members themselves can help in various ways; in particular by assisting the police in the orderly admission of lobbyists at St. Stephen's Entrance, and by refraining from picking out parties of lobbyists from the queue outside the building, because this is always seen by others as queue-jumping and causes resentment and anger. It would also be very helpful if Members could limit their discussion with individual lobbyists in the Central Lobby; if this is done, more people will be able to see their MPs.

Members can also help by assisting lobbyists to leave the Grand Committee Room in the right direction, which is by the North door of Westminster Hall into New Palace Yard. If lobbyists are allowed to go to the Central Lobby from the Grand Committee Room this could be unfair to others who are still waiting outside the Precincts.

I have myself discussed the arrangements for the lobby with the Serjeant at Arms and the police. We all want to ensure that as many lobbyists as possible have access to their Members tomorrow, and if Members have any complaints about the conduct of the lobby we want to deal with them as quickly and helpfully as possible.

I should therefore be grateful if they would bring such complaints to my office or to the Serjeant at Arms rather than seeking to raise them as points of order on the Floor of the House. Meanwhile, I have arranged for notes of guidance on mass lobbies to be available in the Whips' offices for any Member who wishes to have them.

Mr. Peyton

I do not recall any such statement ever having been made before in advance of a lobby such as this. For all that, I think that the right hon. Gentleman is to be congratulated on his thoughtful ness in making that statement.

I entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman that access to Members of Parliament is a very important right. Nevertheless, the right hon. Gentleman should bear in mind, as we all should, that if too many people seek to exercise this right at the same time, it will be frustrated, if not defeated altogether.

The right hon. Gentleman was right to refer to the inevitability of disappointment on these occasions. As it is always the police who are on the receiving end of disappointment and of untoward incidents occurring as a result, I hope that we shall take an opportunity at some time to consider how far we are justified in putting upon the police the burden of handling virtually unmanageable situations.

Mr. Foot

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for the way in which he put his question. The difficulties with which the police have to contend on mass lobbies have been seriously considered by the Services Committee. It is on the basis of that consideration that many of these recommendations are made. 1 thought that it would be easier to say this to the House on the day before the lobby than to try to say it in the atmosphere of what may occur tomorrow. However, I hope that what I have said and what the Services Committee has recommended may help us to make this not only a good lobby but an orderly one as well.

Mr. David Steel

We all have sympathy with the Leader of the House in his difficulties in dealing with a mass lobby of this kind. He says that members of the public have a right of access to their Members of Parliament. Can we in any way make it clear that it is much easier if people lobby their Members of Parliament in their own constituencies? It is asking for trouble to build up frustration when people travel a very long distance only to find that they cannot physically get access when they get here. As this lobby is supported by the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party, will those Members of this House who are members of that committee be on hand to help act as stewards?

Mr. Foot

I do not think there is any question of having special stewards. It is best to leave that matter to the authorities of the House and the police outside. I fully understand that members of the public have access to their Members of Parliament in their constituencies, but it is a long and ancient tradition of this country that members of the public should also have access to Members in this House. 1 do not think that we should abrogate that in any way. We are seeking to ensure that that right is upheld in a way that is sensible.

Mr. George Cunningham

Why does not the Leader of the House say clearly that mass lobbies are not a sensible way for people to meet their Members of Parliament? Members should meet them either in their constituencies—as the hon. Member for Roxburgh, Selkirk and Peebles (Mr. Steel) suggests—or here at the House, and should not try to do so in the presence of thousands and thousands of people, because it is impossible to have any serious discussion in such circumstances. Will the Leader of the House use his influence on outside bodies, where he has a position of influence, not to have a repetition of the farce that we shall experience tomorrow?

Mr. Foot

I do not accept the proposition put by my hon. Friend that mass lobbies are to be attacked or denounced in the comprehensive way that he suggests. I agree that every step should be taken to keep them in proper order, but anyone who knows the history of this country realises that mass lobbies have played a considerable part in the history of our country. It would be deplorable to turn our backs on that altogether.

Mr. Powell

What is the authority for the right hon. Gentleman's statement that it is a fundamental right of a constituent to meet his Member of Parliament at a time and at a place appointed by the constituent himself?

Mr. Foot

The fundamental right about which I am talking—and I should have thought that the right hon. Gentleman would agree with this—is founded in tradition—a very good tradition, too—which goes back deep into the history of this country, whereby members of the public have come to the House of Commons to put their case to their Members. Sometimes they have wished to do it in considerable numbers. The establishment of the women's vote in this country was partly the result of mass lobbies carried out by women to the House of Commons. To say that that is not a part of the tradition and history of this country is an extraordinary proposition.

Mr. Skinner

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the main reason for the mass lobby tomorrow is the record postwar dole figures and the fear of a good many more hundreds of thousands of people that they are to join this ever-lengthening dole queue? Will he, therefore, take account of the fact that only in very recent years has the Services Committee prevented lobbyists from going upstairs to the Committee Rooms and meeting Members there? Can we have that rectified so that even more people can come in? Will the right hon. Gentleman also consider the possibility of allowing lobbyists to go into Westminster Hall, so that many thousands could stay in there? Those are positive propositions, quite apart from getting down the dole queues, which would mean that my right hon. Friend would not have a lobby at all.

Mr. Foot

I shall not go into the general question of what political points members of the lobby may wish to put forward. They will no doubt put their case tomorrow.

With regard to the suggestion by my hon. Friend to allow the lobbyists to go into the Upper Committee Corridor, or in big numbers into Westminster Hall, the Services Committee, which has considered these matters carefully, has recommended against both those propositions. The reason for that is that the Services Committee believes that in such circumstances the security provisions could not be carried out. It is on the basis of the recommendations of the Services Committee that we shall be conducting the lobby tomorrow, but that does not mean that many lobbyists will not be able to get into the Central Lobby. We want to ensure that as many as possible, as smoothly as possible, will be able to exercise that right, and in doing so I think we are approaching the matter in a sensible way.

Sir David Renton

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that although, as he rightly says, there have been mass lobbies for many years, it is only in recent years that they have reached the present great proportions which interfere with the work of the House and the work of individual Members? Will he somehow make it known to the various pressure groups in this country that these mass lobbies are often counter-productive because of the way in which they are conducted?

Mr. Foot

If the House of Commons wishes to forbid mass lobbies, it should take a decision to do so. We should have to debate the matter, and certainly there would be a very strong view to be presented against that of the right hon. and learned Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton). I do not believe that we should forbid mass lobbies. What we have to do is to try to make them function properly. Of course it is true, as the right hon. and learned Gentleman says, that they cannot operate in such a way that they interfere with the business of the House. And there will possibly be some important Divisions in the House tomorrow, and I hope that no Member is to be seduced from his duty in the Lobbies by the lobbyists themselves.

Mr. Alexander W. Lyon

Will my right hon. Friend reconsider his attitude towards the principle of mass lobbies? He admits himself that only about 3,000 constituents will actually get in tomorrow. The unions estimate that there might be 20,000 in the mass demonstration, which means that 17,000 will be frustrated. Moreover, they will think that if they put in a Green Card when they actually reached the Central Lobby, somehow or other their Member will have got it, whereas the officials quite frequently take the Green Cards and put them straight into the wastepaper basket.

Hon. Members

Withdraw.

Mr. Foot

I cannot accept what my hon. Friend says about the officials of the House. I think the officials of the House do their very best to try to deal with these problems in the best possible way, although sometimes they are subjected to great difficulties in the conduct of their business. I say to my hon. Friend—as I said earlier—that if the House wanted to ban mass lobbies, that is another matter altogether. That would have to be debated and decided in the House. Certainly I think it would be a serious departure from the traditions of this country if we were to try to ban mass lobbies.

Mr. Peyton

I very much hope that the right hon. Gentleman will invite his hon Friend the Member for York (Mr. Lyon) in fairly sharp terms to withdraw the charge he has made against officials of the House, who are in no position to defend themselves.

Mr. Foot

I have already repudiated what my hon. Friend said. The question whether he withdraws is for him. I have repudiated entirely the criticism of officials of the House in the matter. I think that the whole House—and my hon. Friend on second thoughts—will appreciate that officials of the House, particularly on such mass lobbies as this, have very great difficulties to contend with and that we should do our best in assisting them.

Several Hon. Membersrose—

Mr. Speaker

I shall take two questions from each side of the House.

Mr. Alexander W. Lyon

On the point raised by the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Peyton), I shall be happy to withdraw an allegation made against officials of the House if that allegation is untrue. All I can say is that at times of mass lobbies I have been told by the officials in the Central Lobby that the burden upon them of distributing the Green Cards is so great that it is impossible for them to do so and that the recipient has been the wastepaper basket, That has been confirmed by my own experience of having constituents who have put in a Green Card and I have never received it even in the mail the following day. If I am wrong, factually, in what I have said, of course, I will withdraw.

Mr. English

I am sure that my right hon. Friend would not wish to mislead the House. Is not one of the problems regarding tomorrow the fact that there are two mass lobbies and not one? One is related to public expenditure and the other is related to the tenants of caravan sites.

Mr. Skinner

They have put it off until next week.

Mr. English

My hon. Friend to whom I always listen, tells me that the second has been put off until next week. But the organisation has not told its members, because its members have been telling me that some of them are still coming tomorrow. May I therefore suggest to my right hon. Friend that whether the caravan site people have put it off officially is irrelevant because some of them, too, are coming tomorrow? Will he therefore instruct the officials of the House and policemen to try to distinguish between the two?

Mr. Foot

Possibly the intervention of my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) has served the purpose, in that if they have not all put it off already, maybe the others will now put it off, having heard this interchange. It would certainly add to the difficulties of the police if they had to distinguish between the two lobbies.

Mr. Churchill

Bearing in mind that the Lord President has made it clear that not one in ten of the lobbyists due to arrive tomorrow will gain access to the Palace of Westminster, and bearing in mind also that the Communist Party and International Socialists are trying to muscle in on this act, does the Lord President not think that it was reckless and irresponsible of his party to suggest that constituency Labour parties should seek to demonstrate against the Labour Government in this way?

Mr. Foot

The hon. Gentleman is trying to muscle in on this discussion which, until he intervened, was a perfectly sensible one dealing with how the House of Commons could best go about its business.

Mr. Younger

Will the Lord President not look again at the principle of this matter? While it may be an inalienable right of every constituent to see his Member of Parliament, is it not the case that this lobby is deliberately designed to be so big that it is unmanageable? Is that not an interference with that right about which the House ought to do something?

Mr. Foot

If the House of Commons wants to change its traditional attitude to mass lobbies it must obviously do so by discussion and vote. What I am seeking to ensure is carried out in the most orderly manner possible is the traditional method of lobbying whereby members of the public who wish to come on lobbies are able to come in as large a number as possible. Of course, it is not possible for all those who come in such numbers to get into the Palace of Westminster, and I thought it right to make that clear in advance so that those who may be disappointed will understand the reasons, instead of venting their disappointment on the police and others.

Mr. John Mendelson

Will the Lord President accept that, despite some of the points that have been made, his announcement will be widely welcomed throughout the country? Is he aware that many people are seriously preparing for this lobby to make representative approaches to their Members? Does he appreciate that, in spite of what the right hon. Member for Down, South (Mr. Powell) said, many of those who will not be able to see their Members will be holding meetings in Central Hall, Westminster? They will have report-back accounts of the meetings that have taken place in the House and will not have a wasted journey. Will my right hon. Friend hold fast to the announcement that he has made and not be deterred by the enemies of democracy who attack the lobby?

Mr. Foot

I can assure my hon. Friend that I shall not be deterred by any of the enemies of democracy that I see opposite.