§ Mr. Tony Benn (Chesterfield)I was able to tell you, Mr. Speaker, a few moments ago, but only then, because I heard the information only at 3 o'clock, that I should like to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 10, for the purpose of drawing attention to a matter of urgency which should take precedence over other business, namely,
the decision of the British embassy in Oslo to demand information from a Norwegian trade union about the extent of its financial support for the National Union of Mineworkers." [Laughter.]Hon. Members may not laugh when they hear the implications of agreeing that foreign embassies in Britain can make direct approaches to organisations here.The British embassy in Oslo has approached the Norwegian National Union of General Workers to demand an answer to two questions: first, "Have you provided financial support for the National Union of Mineworkers?"; secondly, "If so, how and in what form?". In my judgment, this development raises important issues, which I should like very briefly to summarise.
First, who authorised this action? Was it the Foreign Secretary, the Cabinet, the Prime Minister? Secondly, why was no report made to the House? Thirdly, what implications does this have for international relations? Is it now the view of the Government that foreign embassies in London can make demands on any organisations that they choose in pursuit of their own policies? Next, does this indicate that the Government are now a direct party to the dispute—
§ Mr. BennWell, if the British embassy in Oslo is now seeking to pursue this matter, that makes it a direct participant in the dispute.
Is the sequestrator working under the direction of the courts or of the Foreign Secretary? Is the coal board, which is a party to the dispute, responsible for commissioning the embassy to make this inquiry?
The House should debate this matter. The action of the embassy is a sign of desperation by the Government, corning on top of the failure to secure a return to work and the possibility of a rail strike and an interruption of fuel supplies. Such a debate, which would be of considerable national importance, could be easily accommodated within this week's business.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe right hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benn) asks leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter which he believes should have urgent consideration, namely,
the decision of the British embassy in Oslo to demand information from a Norwegian trade union about the extent of its financial support for the National Union of Mineworkers.The right hon. Gentleman and the whole House know that the only decision that I have to take on these applications is whether the matter should have precedence over the business set down for today or tomorrow. I listened with care to what the right hon. Gentleman said, but I regret that I do not consider that the matter which he has raised is appropriate for discussion under Standing Order No. 10; and I cannot, therefore, submit his application to the House.