Scene In House Over Report In “The Times”

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 29070, 5 December 1959, Page 13

Scene In House Over Report In “The Times”

LONDON, December 4. An incident, which the “Guardian” said would have made a fortune for television had it been allowed in, occurred in the House of Commons over a report in “The Times.” It was the cause of a sharp clash between the new Speaker, Sir Harry Hylton-Foster, and Labour members.

The root of the trouble was a report in “The Times” which appeared to answer in advance a question on the order paper for the Postmaster-General (Mr J. Bevins) about telephone tapping. On the morning some hours before the question was to have been answered, “The Times” reported: “It was made clear in Government quarters yesterday that no warrant was issued by the Home Secretary to the Reading police to authorise the intervention.” Mr Marcus Lipton, a Socialist member, complained that the Government had issued a reply to an M.P.’s question before it was answered in the House.

In the twinkling of an eye, the House of Commons was involved in a question of privilege on which members are highly sensitive. Points of order succeeded each other in rapid succession until the. Speaker asked Mr Lipton whether he had “the newspaper.” Mr Lipton had a cutting and he darted to the Chair to hand it over. The Speaker took one glance and said: “I regret the rules of the House do not permit me to receive a fragment. I am compelled to require the newspaper.” The wind was taken out of Mr Lipton’s sails. He had no copy. But support was at hand.

“Get the paper,” hissed Mr Reginald Paget, Q.C., and while Mr Lipton sped from the Chamber, Mr Paget asked the Speaker a question in verbal slow motion. Meanwhile, a copy appeared and was passed from hand to hand to the Socialist front bench. By the time Mr Lipton returned. Mr Patrick Gordon-Walker had it spread out seeking the offending passage. There were now two copies of “The Times” in the Chamber, and, said one observer, its circulation on the Opposition benches can never have been higher. Quickly Mr Lipton handed his copy to the Speaker, who observed drily: “I now have the newspaper. I observe what is there reported.” He ruled that there was no prima facie breach of privilege.

At this, an enraged Mr Aneurin Bevin rose and remarked angrily that the Speaker had no opportunity for reflection “apart from any divine inspiration."

He urged the Speaker to study the point and give his ruling the following day—and got a blunt refusal. There was another rush of points of order, but the Speaker would not budge. He refused to give reasons for Ms ruling and said the House could discipline the Chair when the Chair was wrong. He had his way. A