§ Mr. Tony Benn (Bristol, South-East)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I rise on a point of order of which I gave you previous notice, and do so on behalf of a constituent of mine. She was telephoned last night by a representative of an organisation called Audience Selection, which announced that it was polling 2,000 people in the new Bristol, East constituency. Eight questions were put, five of them referring to me. None of them referred to other candidates. The poll had been commissioned by a consortium of newspapers. Today, I telephoned the company and it confirmed that a poll of that character was being undertaken. I also caused inquiries to be made indirectly of the same company to obtain an estimate of the cost of polling 2,000 people by telephone from London. The estimate given was £6,000.
The issue raises matters of concern to the whole House, which has retained its control over election law and corrupt practices. I shall not weary the House with quotations from "Erskine May", but pages 32 and 33 make it clear that the House transferred the problem of adjudication over corrupt practices to an election court but that the judge would make a report to the House for action under the privileges of the House. The issues that I wish briefly to put before you, Mr. Speaker, are as follows. First, is it proper for telephone canvassing to be undertaken with no limit on expenditure? Secondly, is it proper that costs, in this case twice as great as the legal limits for any candidate—I estimate that the legal limits for Bristol, East are £2,775 for myself and other candidates—should be undertaken? Thirdly, can political canvassing be undertaken in the 788 guise of polling? Fourthly, are newspapers exempt from election law if they call it polling? Fifthly, and most fundamentally, does this constitute a corrupt practice?
The House has been very precise and clear in protecting the democratic process by laying down in law, in the Representation of the People Act, what the legal limits of expenditure should be. If it is the case—as is, I believe, now clear—that the newspapers that commissioned the poll, and Audience Selection, the company undertaking it, are bypassing the rules that the House has imposed, issues of corruption may arise. I accept, Mr. Speaker, that you have not had time to consider the matter in detail, but I felt that it was important to put it to you. Perhaps you could advise me at some stage as to your ruling.
§ Mr. SpeakerI am much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman. The House would not expect me to rule now on the issues that he has raised. I doubt very much whether I shall have any standing in the matter, but I shall write to the right hon. Gentleman in the time left to us, before I myself depart.