§ 11 am
§ Mr. Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton)On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I should like to draw your attention to a matter that pertains directly to the rights of hon. Members on which you might be able to assist us.
On Wednesday—after my hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) had asked under Standing Order No. 20 for a debate upon Anglo-Soviet relations following the decision of the Government to expel a number of Soviet diplomats and journalists—in the presence of the leader of the House, I asked, because of hon. Members' concern about that matter, whether it would be possible for the Foreign Secretary to make a statement before the House adjourned. There has, of course, been no such statement, but last night the first item on the BBC 9 o'clock news was a story apparently detailing the reasons why the Soviet diplomats and journalists had been expelled. Those reasons included alleged contact between the Soviet embassy and Libyan and Iranian terrorists, and what was referred to as blackmail of Labour Members of Parliament.
I submit that the rights of the House are affected in two ways. First, Mr. Speaker noted the fact that the Leader of the House was present when we requested a statement on the matter. It is completely unacceptable that the Government should fail to make a statement to the House, and further that sources authoritative enough for the BBC to feel justified in using them as its first lead story on its main news bulletin have attempted to clarify and amplify what the Foreign Secretary did not inform the House about on Monday and what he has refused to inform the House about since. Therefore, I believe that it is a serious affront to the House that Ministers have failed to give information that has been requested, and yet the broadcasting media, by some source or another, have been given amplifying information which has been directly denied to the House and about which hon. Members could ask questions of the Foreign Secretary.
Secondly, if there were to be any validity in allegations that hon. Friends of mine have been subject to blackmail, it would have been proper, through long-standing practice, for the Government to notify my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition and/or myself, and no such notification has been given either to my right hon. Friend or to myself, or for some information to be made available. I have contacted the Foreign Secretary's office this morning, and it is completely unable to clarify the situation. What we have, therefore, is briefing from sources—authoritative enough to have satisfied the BBC that the matter should be its main story on its main news bulletin—making implications about hon. Members which, if they are to be validated in any way, should be made to the House, or, at any rate, through the proper channels, to the Leader of the Opposition.
The House has been affronted in two ways. First, 1256 information has been given to the BBC which has been denied to the House, although it has asked for it; secondly, that information purports to make statements which involve the standing of hon. Members. Clearly that is a serious affront to the House.
It is necessary for the Foreign Secretary to come to the House this morning, as the House will adjourn this afternoon for more than a week, because otherwise the conclusion we will have to draw is that a week after those expulsions—with no information having been given to the House other than the Foreign Secretary's reply to my private notice question last Monday—an attempt is being made covertly to justify action which the Foreign Secretary, for reasons which I thought proper at the time, was unwilling to justify overtly. That is clearly unacceptable.
The House is being affronted in those two ways when at the same time it is clear that what has taken place is a blatant attempt—successful, too—at news management by authoritative Government sources, so that various implications can be trailed across the BBC to prevent yesterday's main news story—the disastrous trade figures—having its proper prominence. That is an example of news management which is an affront to the House of Commons. I ask you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to obtain a statement for us.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker)I remind the House that we are encroaching on valuable private Members' time. I have received no request for a statement to be made, and, of course, the right hon. Gentleman knows that I do not have the authority to require a Minister to make a statement. Doubtless what the right hon. Gentleman has said will be made known to the appropriate Ministers. The right hon. Gentleman, equally, would not expect me to accept any responsibility for statements made either in the media or by the Government. If the right hon. Gentleman is alleging, as he appears to be, that there has been a contempt of the House, he knows that he must follow the appropriate procedure, which is to write to Mr. Speaker conveying the details of the allegations.
I hope that we can now get on.
§ Mr. KaufmanI do not want to take up the time of the House, but hon. Members simply do not appear to care about the way in which the House has been treated. I thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for the way in which you have responded. I was not for one moment implying that you carry responsibility for these matters other than the fact that you have the proper duty of protecting the rights of the House. I say to you, however, in the presence of the Government Deputy Chief Whip, that the Opposition believe that this matter should be the subject of a statement. Either the Government have information, in which case they had better provide it, or they have no information and this is a piece of blatant and contemptible news management.