GCHQ (Lobby of Parliament) (Hansard, 21 February 1984)

§ Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It was brought to my attention this morning by one of my constituents who is a civil servant that instructions have been issued by the Civil Service Department than no civil servant will be allowed to take a day of his or her annual leave entitlement in order to attend the lobby of Parliament this Thursday, 23 February, in respect of the GCHQ trade union ban.
I believe that the instruction from the Civil Service Department represents a gross interference in the right of constituents to approach their Members of Parliament and, even more important from the point of view of the House, the right of access of Members of Parliament to their constituents on a matter of national significance. Would you, Mr. Speaker, use your good offices with the Ministers concerned to bring about the withdrawal of the instruction, which is fundamentally anti-democratic and an interference in the rights of the House with regard to access?
If disciplinary action is taken against my constituent because he attends the lobby in order to lobby his Member of Parliament, I intend to make representations to you, Sir, that that would be a breach of parliamentary privilege. This is an interference in the rights of Members and of their constituents.

§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)
Further to the point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is there not an element here of sauce for the goose and sauce for the gander? Is it not important to consider that, if the argument were deployed that Cheltenham should not be disrupted, it would apply no less to Sir Brian Tovey, the former director of GCHQ, who, since he joined Plessey, has been trying to tempt key employees away from GCHQ to his present company? If he is allowed to get away with that, how can it be suggested that employees of Cheltenham, Brora or elsewhere cannot take a day off to exercise their democratic duty to see their Members of Parliament?

§ Mr. Speaker
A question was answered on this matter yesterday. I thank the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) for giving me notice of his point of order. It has enabled me to look into it. I assure the hon. Member that the rules governing access to the House on Thursday 23 February will be no different from any other day.

§ Mr. Dalyell
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Do we understand that you will look into this matter from the point of view of parliamentary privilege?

§ Mr. Speaker
No; that is a different matter.
Matters of privilege must be raised with me in writing.

§ Mr. Banks
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Do I understand that the instruction issued by the Civil Service Department, which clearly impinges upon the rights of constituents, to lobby their representatives will be withdrawn?

§ Mr. Speaker
No, I cannot say that, because I am not responsible for any decisions of the Government Department. What I am saying is that I am satisfied that access to this House will be no different on Thursday from any other day.

§ Mr. Dalyell
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I understand that this matter has been sprung upon you at a fairly late stage. Would you consider the matter with your advisers and perhaps, after 24 hours, make a ruling at 3.30 pm tomorrow?

§ Mr. Speaker
My concern is about access to this House. I am not concerned with any instructions that may or may not have been given to members of the Civil Service. A question was asked yesterday, and the hon. Member can see the answer. I am concerned to ensure that there is proper access on Thursday, and I can say that that will be the case.

§ Mr. Allan Roberts (Bootle)
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Have you addressed your mind not only to the question of access to the House but to that of access of constituents to their Members of Parliament? I address you in your capacity as protector of the tights of Back-Bench Members. Are not the Executive trying to prevent access by constituents to their representatives? Whether there is access to the House or not, the Government are interfering with the rights of our constituents to take leave in order to see their hon. Members. Whether our constituents see us in the House or elsewhere, that seems to border on a breach of privilege.

§ Mr. Speaker
If it is a matter of privilege, the non. Member must raise it with me in the appropriate way. The Member must not involve me in a matter of political controversy.