HC Deb 11 February 1985 vol 73 cc38-9 4.36 pm
Mr. John Morris (Aberavon)

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 10, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely, the misuse of section 2 of the Official Secrets Act and whether the Attorney-General, in current circumstances, should have granted his consent to prosecute in the case of the Queen v. Ponting.

The intervention of the Leader of the House on a preemptive point of order does not satisfy us. A statement is to be made by a person unknown—the Government are coy about revealing who will make the statement. That is no substitute for a debate at the earliest opportunity.

This matter is specific. As the House began this afternoon's sitting, the news reached us of the aquittal of Mr. Clive Ponting. It might be said that it was as much a conviction of the Government as an aquittal of Mr. Ponting. It is possibly a reflection on the role of the Secretary of State for Defence and his Minister of State, both of whose actions must cause considerable anxiety to the House.

It is important that the Attorney-General, with the Solicitor-General, took the decision to prosecute in a case where there was, on the Crown's admission, no security consideration. It is important that we hear the Attorney-General's justification for his decision. On 12 November 1984 he told the House: Once the case has been disposed of, I shall have to answer for my decision here, and I am not frightened to do it."—[Official Report, 12th November 1984; Vol. 67, c. 410.]

The matter is urgent because, for all we know, there may be other cases pending that are awaiting the decision of the Attorney-General. Can the House save the Crown from falling flat on its face again? Are others to be put in unnecessary jeopardy because of the Attorney-General's decisions and Parliament's failure to substitute a code that is more intelligible and more capable of enforcement? That was the effect of the Lord Chancellor's words when he was introducing a Bill seeking the protection of official information in 1979. That measure sought to deal with the issue and to limit criminality.

Mr. Speaker

The right hon. and learned Member for Aberavon (Mr. Morris) asks leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that he thinks should have urgent consideration, namely, the misuse of section 2 of the Official Secrets Act and whether the Attorney-General, in current circumstances, should have granted his consent to prosecute in Regina v. Ponting.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman has raised this matter at the first possible opportunity. He knows that the verdict was announced after I took the Chair and he has heard the Leader of the House say that there is to be a statement tomorrow. I have listened with care to the right hon. and learned Gentleman, but I regret that I do not consider the matter which he has raised as appropriate for discussion under Standing Order No. 10 and, therefore, I cannot submit his application to the House.

Mr. Chris Smith (Islington, South and Finsbury)

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not wish in any way to contest your ruling on the application of my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Aberavon (Mr. Morris) to seek to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 10. However, I have a constituency interest in the matter that he raised and I seek your guidance on how it will be possible, after tomorrow's statement, to call the Government to account for their motives and reasons for bringing the prosecution in the first place. It does not seem to be possible, after a statement, to put such questions to the Attorney-General. I ask for guidance on this extremely important matter.

Mr. Speaker

I cannot advise the hon. Member about tactics, and he would not expect me to do so. He should wait for the statement tomorrow. If he catches my eye he will have the opportunity to put a question to the Minister who makes the statement. There are other parliamentary ways of bringing this matter before the House.

Forward to