HC Deb 26 January 1978 vol 942 cc1596-601
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Michael Foot)

Last evening, I said that if there had been any improper delay in deciding the Division on one of the votes, it could not be condoned by the House and would be regarded as most reprehensible.

I later conducted immediate inquiries among Members on this side of the House who had apparently been engaged in an altercation in the Lobby about a subsequent Division. I think this discussion was improperly prolonged and could have affected the timing of the next vote, although in the event it did not.

I apologise to the House that this should have occurred, and I trust it will not happen again.

Mr. Pym

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Before I put questions to the Lord President, Mr. Speaker, may I ask you whether you have received reports about what occurred last night and whether you have any observations to make upon the situation that developed?

Mr. Speaker

I did this morning call for a report of what happened last night. I say at once that there is no appeal to me in respect of any actions by the occupant of the Chair in Committee, and nothing that I now say should be taken as indicating that there is such a right.

However, as Speaker I am concerned with all questions relating to the general conduct of Members in the House and in the Lobbies. For that reason I asked the Serjeant at Arms this morning, and the Clerks who were on duty in the Division Lobby, to give me a report of what happened. The report that I have received indicates that there were about five hon. Members who were in the Lobby at the time that the Serjeant at Arms entered, and that it was not apparent that they had any intention of leaving.

The Lord President has made it clear in his statement that he confirms that report and that the discussion went on too long. These facts were reported to the Chairman in Committee at the time, and there is no doubt in my mind that the action taken by him in ordering the Tellers to return immediately to the Table was correctly taken.

I add that whether or not the hon. Members who were left in the Lobby were counted, it would not have made any difference to the result of the Division.

In looking for precedents this morning—[Interruption.] This is not a light matter. I found that action of a similar nature to that taken by the First Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means was taken by my predecessor, Mr. Speaker Whitley, in 1926, when he used the following words: My own action in summoning the Tellers to the Table was to deal with a new emergency. I shall always think it right to use my powers in this Chair to deal with events that may not be specifically provided for in the Standing Order."—[Official Report, 14th April 1926; Vol. 194 c. 431.] I have two observations to make to the House. First, I am entirely convinced that the First Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means, in very difficult circumstances, maintained the highest traditions that the House expects of the occupant of the Chair. Secondly, it is a grave abuse of our parliamentary proceedings for any hon. Member to delay in the Division Lobby in such a way that a further vote on business controlled by a timetable motion could be prevented.

It would have been open to the First Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means to name any hon. Member who in his view was obstructing the Division, but had he done so he would have prevented the House having the opportunity for the further Division. Therefore, in my opinion the First Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means followed the wisest course open to him.

I strongly deprecate any attempt to impede the democratic processes by which we work in this House.

Mr. Pym

Further to my point of order, Mr. Speaker. Does the report of the Serjeant at Arms identify the hon. Members concerned?

Mr. Speaker

If the House wishes it, I shall have the report of the Serjeant at Arms to me inserted in Hansard.

Hon. Members

Yes.

Hon. Members

No.

Mr. Speaker

Obviously, the Serjeant at Arms identified the names.

Mr. Pym

After the Lord President's forthcoming statement last night, I think that his statement today will be received with disappointment. I describe it as half admission and half excuse. The right hon. Gentleman refers to a discussion that was improperly prolonged and could have affected the timing of the next vote, although in the event, it did not. I think that some hon. Members will feel that that is a less than frank description. Had it not been for the proper action of the Chair, the deliberate attempt to prevent the next vote from taking place would have been successful.

In view of the fact that three Ministers were involved, as is widely believed to be the case, and understood to be so in the House, will the right hon. Gentleman give the House the Government's view of the Government's responsibility for this completely improper incident? The right hon. Gentleman's statement refers to Members, but in fact Ministers were involved. In that circumstance, I think that the House would like to know from the right hon. Gentleman what the Government propose to do about it.

Mr. Foot

My statement today was not intended in any sense to detract from what I said yesterday on the spur of the moment. I intended my statement today to be what I believe it to be—namely, a full, clear and frank apology to the House for what occurred. I believe that it is in the tradition of the House that such statements are usually accepted.

It is the case that some Ministers were involved, but I do not believe that that alters or detracts in any sense from the apology that I have given to the House. If I may say so, with respect, I believe that the House owes a great debt to the First Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means for the way in which he dealt with the matter. If I had been able to express that feeling last night, I should have done so, but I express it now.

I suggest that the statement I have made fully accords with the way in which these matters have been dealt with previously. I repeat, I apologise to the House for the fact that this occurred. We shall take every possible step to ensure that it is not repeated.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I should think that the House would be ready to move on to the next statement.

Mr. Heffer

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. While not challenging your decision, Mr. Speaker, perhaps I may say that there are many of us on the Labour Benches who would like to make absolutely clear that we accept the Lord President's statement, that we feel that it is absolutely correct, and that we believe that he had absolutely nothing to do with what happened last night. The House ought to accept it. Opposition Members should be more generous than they have been about this matter.

Mr. William Hamilton

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I should like to associate myself with the statement of my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer) that the Lord President has acted fairly. However, will the Lord President consider referring to the Procedure Committee the question of a time limit on Members remaining in the Lobby after the doors are locked? I should like to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that I happen to know that there were Scottish National Party Members in the Lobby concerned, and I think that it would be desirable for the House as a whole—indeed, I think that it is a right of the House—to know the names of the Members who were involved.

Mr. Speaker

I indicated earlier that I was prepared to put into Hansard for today the report that I had from the Serjeant at Arms. I think that that will meet the wishes of both sides of the House.

We have had a very full statement. I hope that hon. Members will not prolong this matter unduly.

Mr. David Steel

As the Leader of the House has made it clear, both last night and today, that he regards what happened as improper and reprehensible, and as he has conveyed an apology to the House, surely we ought to accept that and leave the matter at that.

The possible effect of what happened last night would not only have been to prevent a vote but, as I pointed out to those concerned in the Lobby at the time, to prevent my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond) from making his speech in support of his constituency. While it is quite possible that my right hon. Friend, at the end of the day, received more support as a result of not making his speech, it is none the less inexcusable. The end result will be that the matter concerned, which my right hon. Friend has been trying to raise several times, will now have to be discussed on Report.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. English

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Would you reflect upon whether you ought to institute the precedent of publishing the Serjeant at Arms's reports to yourself? If the Opposition or anyone else in the House had come to you to complain about any Division last night, would not the simple procedure be, either on Report or elsewhere, to hold it again?

Mr. Speaker

I gave considerable thought to this matter before I made that statement, but I believe that the House has the right to the information.

Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. There is one aspect of this matter that is as yet unclear. If the members of the Government who obstructed the business of the House last night were acting on the instructions of the Government, it is quite proper for the Leader of the House to apologise on their behalf. But if the Deputy Chief Whip and others obstructed the proceedings of the House as private Members and not on the instructions of the Government, the Leader of the House is not in a position to apologise on their behalf. Only they can do so.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Watt

As one of those who were principally involved last night—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I really cannot understand the excitement that is being engendered. The Whips of the SNP were engaged in prolonged discussion—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—with the Government Whips. No Ministers were involved. [Interruption.] Perhaps I may tell the House that had it been our intention deliberately to prolong proceedings, my hon. Friends on the SNP Bench would have done it in an orthodox manner—[Laughter.]—by raising points of order until the time limit. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] It was because—[Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker

Order. I have two things to say. First, I think that the hon. Member for Banff (Mr. Watt) has helped the House enough by now and, second, I would esteem it a favour if he would now make his explanatory statement as brief as possible.

Mr. Watt

I shall certainly make it as brief as possible, if I am allowed to do so, Mr. Speaker. Surely the fact that I did not use that method indicates to the House most sincerely that SNP Members had no intention whatsoever of unduly prolonging the proceedings.

Hon. Members

Oh!

Mr. Speaker

Order. That is enough for one day.

Following is the report:

Dear Mr. Speaker,

In case the matter is raised later on today, I think I should report that during a Division on the Scotland Bill at approximately 10.50 p.m. last night the first Deputy Chairman instructed me to find out what was happening in the "No" Lobby. I accordingly entered the "No" Lobby and found some five Honourable Members there. I explained that I had been sent to find out what was happening and I asked them if they were going to vote. I gathered that they were still in the process of discussing how they would vote in the next Division. I therefore reported to the Chair that "there are approximately five Honourable Members still in the 'No' Lobby". The Tellers came in as soon as the first Deputy Chairman had instructed them to bring the figures to the Chair.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Thorne,

Serjeant at Arms.

The Right Hon. George Thomas, MP,

Speaker,

House of Commons.

Dear Mr. Speaker,

Further to my note of this morning about last night's happenings in the "No" Lobby, the five Members—should you require to know their names—were as follows:

and to the best of my recollection Mr. Stallard. I do not know if any of them had passed the Tellers either before I spoke to them or while I was making my report to the Chair.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Thorne,

Serjeant at Arms.

The Right Hon. George Thomas, MP,

Speaker,

House of Commons.