HC Deb 27 November 1980 vol 994 cc577-8
Mr. Alexander W. Lyon (York)

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely, the case of the Home Office against Harriet Harman".

Judgment in the case was given this morning and no notice of appeal has yet been entered. Therefore, the matter is not sub judice.

I make my application because the case raised two issues of fundamental importance to the House. The first is the issue raised in the hearing, namely, whether documents produced and read out in full in court can be secluded from the public view for further repetition elsewhere, so that open government is frustrated by the action of the courts in narrowing the law of contempt.

Since that undermines the principles on which the new contempt Bill, which is to be discussed in another place in the next few days, is based, it is surely right that this House should have an early opportunity of indicating that that principle violates the understanding that has been reached on where the law of contempt should apply.

Secondly, and perhaps even more important for the House, we should have an early opportunity of discussing the question of who decides whether such a principle should be put before the courts so that judges make a ruling and apply new law rather than the House deciding what the law is. The decision was made not by the Home Secretary or any Minister in the Home Office and not by the Attorney-General or any Law Officer but by civil servants who decided that it was appropriate in this case to go further and enunciate a new rule of law. It does not matter that in the event the puisne judge decided in their favour.

The issue for the House to consider is whether that sort of extension of the law should be under the control of Ministers or their officials. That matter ought to be discussed, whatever the outcome of the case. I hope, therefore, that you, Mr. Speaker, will allow us to have an early discussion by conceding that this is an appropriate matter to discuss under the Standing Order No. 9 procedure.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member for York (Mr. Lyon) gave me notice before 12 o'clock, and after the verdict in this case had been announced, that he would seek leave to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9 for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that he thinks should have urgent consideration, namely, the case of the Home Office against Harriet Harman".

I listened to the hon. Gentleman with concern and care, but I regret to say that his submission does not fall within the provisions of the Standing Order and, therefore, I cannot submit his application to the House.