HC Deb 25 April 1988 vol 132 cc31-3

4.2 pm

Mr. Michael Foot (Blaenau Gwent)

May I raise a point of order that arises out of Question Time, Mr. Speaker? I understand that you called the Secretary of State for Wales to order because he used the word "hypocrisy" or "hypocrite". Of course, all efforts to raise the standard of language that is used by Ministers of the Crown are highly commendable; we understand what an arduous task you must have in that respect. But is your ruling unduly restrictive?

I recall a famous occasion—it was a bit before my time, but it happened in the House—when Mr. Lloyd George was dealing with the leader of the Social Democrats of the day, who crossed the Floor and assisted the Conservatives at the time. Lloyd George said that he objected not so much to his crossing the Floor but to the "slime of hypocrisy" that he left behind.

Ruling that out of order is a restrictive method of reply and use of language. There are many occasions, particularly when dealing with this Administration, when we must use the word "hypocrisy" to be accurate.

Several Hon. Members

rose——

Mr. Speaker

Order. I can deal with the matter. I thought that I heard the right hon. Gentleman accuse another hon. Member of hypocrisy. That is unparliamen-tary. To use the word in a general sense would not be unparliamentary.

Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. On the matter of parliamentary language, it will be within your knowledge that, at 10 o'clock this morning, I asked the learned Clerk why, on Tuesday, the Leader of the Opposition was allowed to use the words "organised mendacity", why I was equally allowed to do so on Wednesday, and why, by Friday, the term had become unacceptable. Will you explain?

Mr. Speaker

I was not present at that time on Friday, but I am sure that the Chairman of Ways and Means, who was in the Chair at the time, took the right decision in the matter.

Mr. Alan Williams (Swansea, West)

On a different point of order arising out of Question Time, Sir. In answer to question No. 3 today relating to the coal industry, the Secretary of State for Wales said that not a word had been heard from the Opposition Front Bench since certain comments made by the Minister of State in the Welsh day debate. My clear recollection is that, the day after that debate, in an attempt to divert attention from the humiliation that the Secretary of State suffered in the debate, he issued through Conservative Central Office a statement——

Mr. Speaker

There must be a point of order to me. The right hon. Gentleman must not seek to continue——

Mr. Williams

rose——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The right hon. Gentleman must not seek to continue Question Time.

Mr. Williams

This is a legitimate point of order, Mr. Speaker. Misleading the House, even inadvertently, is and always has been subject to a point of order. I have given you, Sir——

Mr. Speaker

Order. I must say to the right hon. Member that he is attempting a continuation of Question Time.

Mr. Williams

I am not.

Mr. Speaker

Order. We had a long run on question No. 3. The final hon. Member to be called was from the Opposition Front Bench. If there was any misunderstanding or disagreement with what the Secretary of State said, he should have disagreed with it then and not now. I cannot hear a point of order on the matter. This is a continuation of Question Time. I call Mr. Madden.

Mr. Williams

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

No. It is an attempt to continue Question Time.

Mr. Max Madden (Bradford, West)

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will remember that, on Friday, I raised with you an article that appeared in The Guardian that morning concerning the Economic League. At column 1100 of Hansard, you said that you would consider the article over the weekend. I thought that I should report to you and to the House that I contacted the Economic League this morning. It confirmed that it holds information about me——

Mr. Speaker

Order. This is a matter on which the hon. Gentleman has written to me, asking me to look at it as a matter of privilege. He knows that he cannot now raise it on the Floor of the House. I shall consider carefully what the hon. Member has said in this letter that I have in my hand.

Mr. Eric S. Heffer (Liverpool, Walton)

Further to the point of order that was raised by my right hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Foot), Mr. Speaker. I once wrongly said in the House that a Conservative Member was a "bloody hypocrite". I was quite rightly instructed by the Speaker to withdraw. I withdrew the word "bloody". I never withdrew the word "hypocrite". Why is it right for me to get away with the word "hypocrite" but not right for other hon. Members to say that somebody is a hypocrite?

Mr. Speaker

I hope that the whole House will agree that we need to ensure that we do not allege any dishonourable motive of any kind on the part of an hon. Member. In answer to the right hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Foot), I stated that it was perfectly in order to use the word "hypocrisy" in a general sense, but not of each other.

Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North)

Further to the point of order that was raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, West (Mr. Madden), Mr. Speaker. I realise that you have received a letter asking whether privilege is involved in the Economic League's activities. Since Friday, the Economic League has been making further statements about hon. Members and the files that it keeps on them. The matter is important and urgent. It is clearly a serious attack on democracy in this country.

When do you expect to be able to report to the House on your deliberations on what appears to be a breach of privilege of the House?

Mr. Speaker

I received the letter just before I came into the Chamber. I have not yet had time to consider it.

Mr. Donald Anderson (Swansea, East)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. When you come to examine the article in The Guardian about the Economic League's blacklist, will you bear in mind that to appear on the Economic League's blacklist—I am mentioned in the article as being on the blacklist because I went to Chile —s for some of us a badge of honour? Will you bear in mind also the separation between hon. Members, who cannot be harmed, and others who are not able to reply and whose job prospects may be adversely affected by that sort of conclusion?

Mr. Speaker

I will certainly consider what the hon. Member said.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)

On the question by my hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) about "organised mendacity", Mr. Speaker, you said that the matter was dealt with on Friday by the Chairman of Ways and Means. I heard my hon. Friend, and I think that hon. Members should know, if they have not already read Hansard, exactly what he said, because it is important.

Mr. Speaker

I am sure that the matter was dealt with entirely correctly by the occupant of the Chair at that time. It is not for me to pass judgment on what he said on that occasion.

Mr. Skinner

rose——

Mr. Speaker

No, I cannot hear the hon. Gentleman on a matter that happened on Friday. He should have raised the matter then.

Mr. Skinner

But——

Mr. Speaker

Order.