Civil Servant (Briefing) (Hansard, 24 November 1986)

§ Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)
I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 20 to discuss a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely, the Government's decision to require a named civil servant to make statements on behalf of the Government, to issue attacks on Members of the House of Commons in the knowledge that the civil servant was to be named in The Independent newspaper and referred to in The Guardian, while refusing to make similar statements in answer to written questions tabled by me. The matter is urgent because the Government have now deployed a procedural device to gag Members of Parliament. The whole world's press is perplexed, aghast and at a loss to understand why the British Parliament cannot debate these matters.
The British Government are making an ass of themselves in the Australian court and using civil servants to make statements to which the Prime Minister says it would be inappropriate to make in reply to Members. It is being said that whereas, in medieval times, kings debased the coinage, the Government are today undermining the flag.
The British people object. We have no opportunity for oral parliamentary questions, no Adjournment debates are available and private notice questions are at your discretion, Mr. Speaker. You must inevitably find yourself in difficulty with private notice question applications, and meanwhile Whitehall leaks.
The matter is important because the Government have put up a Downing street junior, a civil servant, to make political attacks on individual Members of Parliament. The Government are abusing the Civil Service, and Mr. Jim Coe and Mr. Bernard Ingham would do well to consider their position. To say that this is being done to influence opinion without the Government accepting responsibility is not good enough and is a fraud. A naked civil servant is being used not only to attack hon. Members but to scatter the seeds of division between the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General.
In a shabby betrayal of a Cabinet colleague, the Prime Minister is inducing civil servants to attack the Attorney-General. The House must recognise that the Attorney-General took his instructions from, and was guided by, the British Prime Minister in all his actions. She is at the head of Britain's security services. These decisions were her decisions and she cannot deny her responsibility. The trade of a Prime Minister who lacks the courage to admit failure and who then uses the scalpel remorselessly to incise the reputation of a parliamentary friend and colleague of 25 years, is one of treachery. We need a courageous decision from you, Mr. Speaker, to exert the authority of Parliament and to give us time for a debate.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Gentleman the Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) asks leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that he believes should have urgent consideration, namely, the Government's decision to permit a named civil servant to make statements on behalf of the Government. As the hon. Gentleman knows, my sole decision in these matters is whether the matter should take precedence over the orders set down for today or tomorrow. I regret that I do not consider that the matter that has been raised is appropriate for discussion under Standing Order No. 20, and therefore, I cannot submit his application to the House.

§ Mr. Brian Sedgemore (Hackney, South and Shoreditch)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. This concerns the use of a room within this building. I have been making some inquiries and I find that there is a room in the Turret which does not exist, in which are held meetings that do not take place. Speaking about the activities that go on in that room, Sir Robert Armstrong said in the Australian court today: The people who are there seek to influence opinion without accepting responsibility and seek to place in the public domain ideas which Government wish not to be seen to be putting there. My point of order is this. Bearing in mind that the Prime Minister said, on Thursday that it would be inappropriate to discuss certain matters here, but then instructed a civil servant to discuss those matters in the room upstairs, at the meeting that did not take place, is it not time that you, Mr. Speaker, ruled the lobby out of order?

§ Mr. Speaker
It is a long-established practice, as I understand it.

§ Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. If Mr. Jim Coe has been attacking an hon. Member, could you guide me and tell me who is the Minister to whom we should direct inquiries? Is it the Prime Minister, as head of the Civil Service?

§ Mr. Speaker
I am not responsible for Mr. Coe.