§ Mr. Ron Lewis (Carlisle)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wish to raise with you a matter of which I have given you prior notice, although I understand that my letter, which was posted from the north of England on Good Friday, had not reached your office by midday today. Therefore, I apologise, Mr. Speaker although it is not my fault. I gave notice as soon as I was able to read the debate in Standing Committee C.
I wish to ask your ruling, Mr. Speaker, on the following matters because in my simple judgment a situation has occurred in Standing Committee C which should cause the House grave concern. At the first sitting of the Committee, dealing with the Licensing (Amendment) Bill, no fewer than three hon. Members supporting the Bill declared interests that linked them with the sale of alcoholic liquor. The Official Report of the Committee proceedings of Wednesday 8 April 1987 at columns 15 and 16 reports that the hon. Member for Gillingham (Mr. Couchman) declared that he was the managing director of a small company, Chiswick Caterers Ltd., which operates live tenanted public houses.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman is going now to the substance. What is the point of order for me?
§ Mr. LewisI am coming to that, Mr. Speaker.
The hon. Member for Romsey and Waterside (Mr. Colvin) declared his interest as a licensee and the hon. Member for Thanet, North (Mr. Gale) declared his interest as an adviser to Scottish and Newcastle Breweries. In addition, the hon. Member for Gillingham is the Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Minister for Health. The Government are supposed to be neutral on private Member's Bills and I think it unusual for the Parliamentary Private Secretary to be added to the Committee in view of his relationship with the Department of Health and Social Security. I would have thought that he should be particularly careful to avoid getting involved in any argument on liquor licensing.
It is clear that no fewer than three hon. Gentlemen on the Committee have declared interests of one kind or another in a Bill which deals with the liberalising of drinking hours and increased alcohol consumption, therefore increased profits for the drink trade. Is it in accordance with the rules, practice, interests and honour of the House that those hon. Gentlemen should continue to sit on the Committee? I ask for your ruling, Mr. Speaker. If you wish to take time to consider that point, which is important for the way in which we conduct our affairs in the House, may I suggest that the Committee's afternoon siting should be suspended? I am sure that the Chairman of the Committee would give the guidance that you wish to give.
You will, Mr. Speaker——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I should like to reply now, because the hon. Gentleman has taken a great deal of time to raise a matter with which I can deal on the spot.
§ Mr. LewisI am coming to the point, Mr. Speaker. This is the earliest opportunity I have had to raise the matter with you as I did not see the Official Report of the Committee proceedings until after the House had gone into recess for Easter, so in my simple judgment I have acted correctly and, if I may say so, honourably.
676 I am prepared to believe that all three hon. Gentlemen consider that they acted honourably in declaring their interests, as all hon. Members must do in accordance with the traditions of the House. But surely—this is one of my main points of contention — it is wrong that legislation with far-reaching and adverse social effects can be rushed through and particularly—this is a crucial point — that the three hon. Gentlemen supported the sittings motion to sit more or less morning and afternoon which was passed before they declared their interests. Should they not have declared their interests immediately the Committee started? I recall——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman is being unfair to other hon. Members who wish to take part in the Second Reading debate on the Finance Bill. Please allow me to deal with the matter——
§ Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)rose——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder.
I have had an opportunity to read the hon. Gentleman's letter in the newspapers this morning and I must say straight away that, although I accept that he posted the letter to me, I deprecate letters addressed to me being sent to the press.
As to the substance of the hon. Gentleman's point of order, the hon. Gentleman has been here as long as I have and is an experienced Member—[Interruption.] Order. The hon. Gentleman will know that any motions passed in Standing Committee or any other action which is taken by a Standing Committee are not subjects for appeal to me as Speaker. They are entirely matters for the Committee to determine in accordance with the House's direction. I cannot help the hon. Gentleman further.
§ Mr. Winnickrose——
§ Mr. James Couchman (Gillingham)Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I read the article in The Guardian this morning with astonishment. The hon. Member for Carlisle (Mr. Lewis) had not warned me that he proposed—[Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman had not given me warning or sought to talk to me about the matter which is under discussion. I have always been scrupulous in the declaration of my vested interests in licensing matters. That is well known to the House and to the Chairman of the Committee of Selection. He knew of my interests at the time that I was placed on Standing Committee C. In making my declaration of interest to the Committee, I made it clear that I had considered whether it was appropriate for me to sit on the Committee, and on balance I did view it as being appropriate and proper.
I declared the interest which I declared on Second Reading, and I declared it again in Committee after the sittings motion. I did so having spoken to the Chairman of the Committee before the Committee convened and I looked to him to guide me as to when he wanted me to declare that interest. He duly looked to me between the sittings motion, which is a technical matter and which does not impinge on the substance of the Bill, and the start of the Bill.
As for the accusation that I am Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Minister for Health, that is entirely true. This is a Home Office Bill, not a DHSS Bill. It would be my contention that the Bill, if passed, will lead to less rather than more abuse of alcohol. I therefore see no conflict between my position as PPS to the Minister for 677 Health and my serving on the Committee. I have spoken about five times in the House on this matter and I have always been scrupulous in declaring my interest.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The House knows that these are matters for discussion in Standing Committee and not on the Floor of the House.
§ Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)I have another point of order.
§ Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerDifferent point of order?
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursRelated.
§ Mr. SpeakerI will not take it.
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursThe public outside expect you to act.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I am bound not by the public outside but by the Rules of the House. The hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) and the House know that this is a matter not for the Floor of the House but for the Standing Committee.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder.
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursWe are not going to let go.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. If the hon. Gentleman starts threatening me like that I will have to take action. I shall take any other point of order which is not concerned with this matter.
§ Mr. SkinnerOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. WinnickYou said that you will not take a particular point of order on this issue, Mr. Speaker, but I wonder whether I could ask you this question on a wider issue which is not concerned with this Committee. In view of the widespread concern which exists outside the House —whether you accept it or not—that business interests are not sufficiently under control, would it be possible for the Select Committee to look into the matter and see whether there is any justification for the view which I believe exists—with some justification—that some hon. Members put their business interests before those of their constituents?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman has a recourse. He may raise that matter with the Select Committee concerned.
§ Mr. SkinnerOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerIs it connected with this matter?
§ Mr. SkinnerAs you know, Mr. Speaker, from time to time the Speaker's Conference is set up to deal with all kinds of matters related to electoral interests and matters which affect hon. Members. Something has been occurring lately—I shall not list all the instances—in respect of the register of Members' interests; no doubt, if you read 678 Hansard, you will see references to that in the past few months. What is needed is for a Speaker's conference to look into a matter that concerns many people outside, which is that Members of Parliament should stop moonlighting altogether and become full-time Members of Parliament. They are paid well enough for doing their job. The Speaker's Conference should have this matter before it to ensure that Members of Parliament do not line their pockets with one thing or another. That necessity has been stressed by the revelations today.
§ Mr. SpeakerThat may be so, but on the substance of this matter I am bound by the Rules of the House, and the House knows that matters of this kind should be raised in the Standing Committee concerned and with the Standing Committee Chairman and not with me.
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursOn another point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. Roger Gale (Thanet, North)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Mr. Gale.
§ Mr. GaleOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I accept your ruling on further discussions of this matter. However, a statement has been made in the House, which impugns my honour as a Member of the House. I seek your protection. I should like the opportunity to make a personal statement to the House on this matter.
§ Mr. SpeakerIf the hon. Gentleman wishes to make a personal statement, he must have it cleared by me in the usual way. As he maintains that his honour has been impugned, he may briefly state why he believes that to be so.
§ Mr. GaleThank you, Mr. Speaker. I am particularly proud, having served an Industry and Parliamentary Trust Fellowship with the Scottish and Newcastle Breweries, to be invited to assist it further. It is a fine company, which makes a major contribution to employment in Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom through tourism. [Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Will the hon. Gentleman come to the point?
§ Mr. GaleYou have indicated, Mr. Speaker, in the House that the processes of this House have been abused by the hon. Member for Carlisle (Mr. Lewis), who released his letter to the press before an answer from you and from the Committee Chairman. This matter was discussed in Committee this morning, and the Chairman is here and could be invited to make a statement. He was adamant that the Committee had behaved honourably and properly.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. All these matters should legitimately be raised in the Committee upstairs with the Chairman concerned, and not on the Floor of the House.
§ Mr. Dave Nellist (Coventry, South-East)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I will take Mr. Nellist first.
§ Mr. NellistNo doubt later this afternoon and tomorrow, when Hansard is printed, you will have the 679 opportunity, Mr. Speaker to go through the exchanges of the past few minutes and to dwell on them at some length. When you do so, Mr. Speaker, perhaps you will consider this factor. A couple of years ago, I was asked to serve on the Committee considering the Nottinghamshire County Council Act. My qualification was that I did not come from Nottinghamshire. Many aspects of the running of the House separate potential conflicting constituency interests from other interests such as business interests.
There may be an avenue of consideration to prevent this from happening again. Those 300 or so Tory Members of Parliament who moonlight with business interests as directors or chairmen of companies could be excluded from considering Bills in Committee when a conflict of interest could take place, in the same way that I was selected to sit on a Committee considering a private Bill concerning Nottinghamshire because I came from Coventry.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman has raised a matter which is not for me but for the Chairman of the Select Committee on Selection.
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerIt must be a legitimately different point of order.
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursYou will recall a year and a half ago, when the Select Committee on Members' Interests published its report on Members' interests, that an argument developed both inside and outside the House as to the position of the hon. Member for Chorley (Mr. Dover) and his interests, which he had fully declared to the House of Commons, quite properly, and his membership of a particular Select Committee of the House, again where he had quite properly declared his interest. The rules as they exist at the moment permit an hon. Member to be paid a remuneration by a firm outside the House to sit and deliberate on proceedings and, in the case of a Select Committee, to be party to the decisions taken by that Committee.
People outside the House will find it very hard to understand how it is that three Members of this House can take money in their back pockets for services rendered and come into the Committee, within our rules, and, by use of procedure, expedite the passage of a Bill before the next general election. That is the crucial issue.
You may say, Mr. Speaker, that this matter is for the Chairman of the Committee, but I put it to you that, as the custodian of our procedures here in the House, you specifically must have an interest in these matters. I ask you yourself to consult the Chairmen of the Committees and the Chairman of the Committee of Selection to ensure that these matters do not happen again. Parliament is being brought into disrepute; that is wrong, and we should act to stop it.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman has in fact raised the point that I said I would not hear. I have already stated that these are matters not for me but for the Chairmen of the Standing Committees and for the Chairman of the Select Committee on Selection.