§ 7. Mr. Cryerasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make statement on the progress of Lord Diplock's review of telephone interception.
§ Mr. WhitelawLord Diplock is still working on his review.
§ Mr. CryerWill the Home Secretary accept that responsibility for these matters should rest with this House, with an annual report debatable in the House, rather than depend upon investigative journalism or any of the other ways in which it is brought to public attention? Does he accept that secret reports by a Tory judge are less than satisfactory—[HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw."]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. It seems that the House is asking me to rule that "Tory" is an offensive word. I am not prepared to rule in that way.
§ Mr. Edward GardnerOn a point of order. Is it in order—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. We usually leave points of order until the end of Question Time.
§ Mr. CryerWill the Home Secretary accept that secret reports by a Tory judge will give the impression that there is a cover-up? Is it not the best form of accountability for the right hon. Gentleman to report directly to this democratically elected House?
§ Mr. GardnerOn a point of order—
§ Mr. WhitelawThe hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer) seems wide of the mark. It is perfectly clear, and was made clear when Lord Diplock was appointed to do this job, that his first review will be published. The hon. Member talks of a "secret" report from a Tory judge, but the report will not be secret. I do not think that Lord Diplock would in the least like to be described as a Tory judge, but that is a matter for Lord Diplock and the hon. Member to sort out and not one for me. The question whether such a report will be debated in the House is not for me, but when Lord Diplock has made his report I should welcome its being debated here.
§ Mr. GardnerOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it in order that one of Her Majesty's judges, who are supposed to have no political colour when they are acting officially as judges, should be labelled with a political label, as the hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer) has tried to do?
§ Mr. SpeakerIt is not our custom to criticise judges or to attribute to them beliefs that they may not have, but I am in some difficulty, because some people may be called Labour judges and feel upset at that description. Someone might be even more distressed to be called a Liberal judge. We had better move on. Mr. Winnick.
§ Later—
§ Mr. LawrenceOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer) referred in questions to Lord Diplock as being a Tory judge. I appreciate that to describe anybody as a Tory is a compliment, and no doubt it was so intended, but the fact remains that Opposition Members are more and more tending to describe judges as Tory.
§ Mr. CanavanThey are all Tories.
§ Mr. LawrenceThat implies a bias. When hon. Members come in this place to talk about judges, is it in order to attribute any bias, complimentary or otherwise, to them?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I, too, have had a chance to consider the point of order raised earlier. It is wrong for any of us to attribute to any judge a bias. It so happens that the judge in this case is not sitting in court. He is acting as chairman for an inquiry for the Home Secretary. However, I deprecate calling judges by anything other than "the judge".
§ Mr. CryerFurther to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. As I understand it, this judge was at one stage in his career a Conservative Party candidate. I do not suppose that his 540 values have changed. If with the record of this Government he has abandoned them, that is very welcome.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I have made it clear that I consider, and in future I shall so rule, that it is offensive to refer to a judge of the High Court in any way other than as a judge of the High Court. It is not for us to add an adjective. Otherwise, we shall be lowering our parliamentary standards.