§ Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will know how I have persisted with you over these weeks—indeed, I courteously left the Chamber last week at your request—on the question of six Conservative Members of Parliament. You will have noted once again the reply of the Leader of the House when I asked a question about the provision of classified information to Select Committees. He immediately hid—as indeed, you did, Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago—behind the concept of security being so important that these matters cannot be discussed. Where do I go from here, Mr. Speaker, because this matter remains? I do not intend to give up, and I may have to persist in ways that the House might not like. [Interruption.] I am just saying what will happen.
I believe that there is a serious consideration that hon. Members must examine, which is the question whether classified information should be given to Select Committees without us knowing whether the members of those Committees—or even members of the Committee of Selection—are fit to handle classified material. The matter cannot go away. I wonder whether you will go away and examine this matter and give me further advice, because I intend to persist in asking for it, and taking other routes if necessary.
§ Mr. Michael Latham (Rutland and Melton)Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Would it not solve all the problems if the hon. Gentleman were to have a chat with my hon. Friend the Member for Thanet, South (Mr. Aitken) and then we could perhaps know who those six Conservative Members are? I would like to know, for example. whether I am one of them.
§ Mr. SpeakerMe too.
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursMight I add to that, because it would be helpful to the House? I have done precisely that. The hon. Member for Thanet, South (Mr. Aitken) is a Member of honour, and he has refused to give me that list.
§ Mr. SpeakerI cannot help the hon. Member. As he well knows, I have given the matter great consideration. He will have to pursue it in the way in which he thinks is right.
§ Mr. Tony Benn (Chesterfield)Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Can I ask you to consider another aspect of this matter? I do not share my hon. Friend's view that Members of Parliament should be vetted—
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursI am not saying that at all.
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursI am not suggesting that at all.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The point of order is to me and not to the hon. Member.
§ Mr. BennMy concern is that there should be vetting of Members of Parliament by the security services, which is a threat to the rights of the House. I am not concerned about whether Members are able to pass the MI5 test or not, because that of itself is a threat to the independence of the House. I would only ask you, therefore, to consider whether it is in order and whether you, Mr. Speaker, would ascertain whether it has occurred and that security services personnel have come to conclusions about the reliability of hon. Members. If that were to prevail, it would not be long before candidates standing for Parliament would have to prove not only that they were not disqualified according to the statute, but that they were not disqualified according to a secret vetting procedure. I hope that, by putting it this way, I can help you to make inquiries on behalf of the House to find out whether it is true that the security services vet Members of Parliament. If that were to occur, that would be the ultimate capitulation of the legislature to the Executive.
§ Mr. SpeakerI share the right hon. Member's views. I hope that hon. Members would not be vetted. We are all right hon. or hon. Members, whichever side of the House we sit on.