HC Deb 15 July 1985 vol 83 cc77-9 7.23 pm
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich)

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Have you been asked by the Secretary of State for Transport for permission to come to the House and make a statement on the findings of Mr. Justice McNeill today in the High Court? According to The London Standard, Mr. Justice McNeill informed the court that the Secretary of State's refusal to approve the GLC ban on lorries was "unreasonable, irrational and unlawful." The article states that, in issuing a 'direction' last February that the ban could not go ahead without a public inquiry, the Secretary of State had "exceeded his powers" under the Road Traffic (Regulation) Act 1984. It adds: The Minister did not have the power under the Act to force them to hold a public inquiry, said the judge. This is not the first time that the Secretary of State has been found to be acting in an unlawful, unacceptable and certainly unreasonable manner. We cannot understand why he has not seen fit, even at this late hour, to come to the House not only to apologise for his irrational behaviour, but at least to make it clear that he had no right to attack the GLC in the manner he did.

Mr. John Ward (Poole)

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Hon. Members

Sit down.

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker)

Order.

Mrs. Dunwoody

What is more, his intention in so doing was totally unlawful. May I remind you, Mr. Deputy Speaker——

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. If I could anticipate the further point of order, the hon. Lady should come to her point of order now.

Mrs. Dunwoody

May I ask you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, whether you are aware that the Prime Minister today told American lawyers in London that the desire for justice imposes very firm requirements on the politician?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. Lady must come to her point of order.

Mrs. Dunwoody

In view of the Prime Minister's statement that unstinting support for the courts which administer the law and for the police who enforce it is the first duty of politicians, why cannot the Secretary of State come to the House and tell us why he is behaving in this arrogant and arbitrary fashion?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

The answer to the hon. Lady's point of order is that I have not received any such request.

Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Would it not be in keeping with the traditions of the House that when a serious matter is raised in the courts, once again catching out this ridiculous Secretary of State who is clearly a recidivist, there should be a statement at the earliest possible opportunity? Surely that is something the Opposition can expect.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

The Secretary of State and the Leader of the House have heard the exchanges and will doubtless take them into account.

Mrs. Dunwoody

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is there any procedure whereby the Secretary of State can come here? I am sure that he would welcome an opportunity to make a statement this evening. Can you tell us how to ensure that that happens?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

On a hypothesis, if a request were to be made, the Chair would have to consider it and seek an appropriate moment for the Minister to make his statement. I have received no such request.

Mr. Eric Deakins (Walthamstow)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is it possible that the matter is sub judice? I understand that the Secretary of State may be considering an appeal. [Interruption.]

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I know nothing about the judgment. I have heard references to what has been reported in The London Standard, but I prefer to see some harder facts. In any case, it is not a matter for me—nor is the hypothetical question of an appeal. The only issue to which I have to respond is whether I have received a request for a statement to be made, and the answer is no.

Mr. Frank Dobson (Holborn and St. Pancras)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. While accepting that something in The London Standard is not necessarily a hard fact, it is a hard fact that the Secretary of State and the Leader of the House are here. Are they going to make a statement? If not, are they going to inform you when they intend to make a statement? This is the second time that the present Secretary of State has been held in the courts to have acted irrationally and unlawfully in relation to the GLC. It is time that he came to the House to explain what he is doing.

Mr. Alfred Dubs (Battersea)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is it possible that the Secretary of State has not yet received the judgment and is awaiting it before coming to the House'? On the previous occasion, legislation was rushed through the House to make legal a previously illegal action by the Secretary of State. The House is surely entitled to know whether that is going to happen again.

Mr. Clive Soley (Hammersmith)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. As a former probation officer, may I offer my services to the Secretary of State? We all make mistakes occasionally. We are all allowed one, but on the second occasion there is an indication that rehabilitation is needed.

We seek your guidance, Mr. Deputy Speaker, on the Prime Minister's comments. She said: The first heresy is that if only a determined minority gather together"——

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman cannot raise a point of order about what the Prime Minister is supposed to have said at a meeting today.

Mr. Soley

I apologise, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The Prime Minister was saying that a minority could not be used to break the law. A member of a minority group—the Government—has been found guilty of breaking the law on two occasions, and that must be a serious matter. We are asking the Minister to give an explanation to Parliament. Having been found guilty before the courts on two occasions, he ought to come to the House and make a statement.

Mr. Ron Leighton (Newham, North-East)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We all support the rule of law. I wonder whether you could advise hon. Members what they should tell constituents when the courts tell us that the Secretary of State for Transport has twice acted irrationally and unlawfully? How are we to explain to our constituents that the country is being run by Secretaries of State who are clearly irrational and behave unlawfully?

Mr. Roland Boyes (Houghton and Washington)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. My hon. Friend the Member for Hammersmith (Mr. Soley) underestimates the magnitude of the problem. As a former assistant director of social services, I believe that this is a section 25 job. I shall be consulting my social services colleagues in London to se whether instant action can be taken against the Secretary of State.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

These are not matters for me, and I cannot give advice to the hon. Member for Newham, North-East (Mr. Leighton). The only question to which I have to respond is whether I have received any indication of a wish to make a statement. I have received no such indication. If there is a will to make a statement, no doubt I shall receive a request.

Mr. Dobson

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I seek confirmation as a genuine point of order. Further to the suggestion of my hon. Friend the Member for Houghton and Washington (Mr. Boyes), will you confirm that it is not possible under the general law for an hon. Member to be subject to section 25 procedure, except with the written consent of Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I know nothing about section 25. Standing Orders are enough for me to worry about.