The Press WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 13,1965. The House Of Commons And Its Speaker

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30880, 13 October 1965, Page 18

The Press WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 13,1965. The House Of Commons And Its Speaker

When the House of Commons meets at the end of the month it will have to elect a new Speaker in place of Sir Harry Hylton-Foster, Speaker since October, 1959, who died suddenly soon after Parliament rose for the summer recess. Traditionally the party whips sound out the views in their parties and try to establish a consensus in favour of one member. The practice has invariably placed in the Chair a man well able to carry the heavy responsibilities of Speaker in a House of 630 members. This time, however, the choice is complicated by the Government’s small majority. By custom, the three occupants of the Chair who do not vote are the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker (the Chairman of Ways and Means), and the Deputy Chairman. In the present Parliament, Conservative constituencies have provided two out of these three non-voting offices, thus in effect giving the Government a bonus vote. At the moment, the Government’s majority has fallen to two. It should win the by-election to be held in Erith and Crayford this month, which would restore the majority to three. But if Labour is to provide the next Speaker the majority will be down to two again; and when Sir Harry Hylton-Foster’s seat is filled (by the staunchly Conservative constituency of the Cities of London and Westminster) it will be down to one.

A first thought—that a Liberal Party member might be elected as a compromise candidate —appears now to have been dismissed, probably because by well-established custom the Speaker continues in the Chair from one Parliament to the next. The nomination of a Speaker, therefore, will not be simply for the brief remainder of this Parliament, but possibly for the next 10 years or more. Emphasising that the choice of a Speaker of the House of Commons is not a party appointment but one for the Commons themselves, as a House, to decide, the “ Guardian ” said that while it is true that there is no obligation on the Conservatives or the Liberals to help Mr Wilson out of a fix, it is just as true that there is no obligation on the Government as such to find a successor when the Speaker dies in office. There should be some “plain understanding”, the “ Guardian ” said, in all three parties that this is not an occasion for improving the Government’s majority by one, nor for reducing it by one. “ The Times ” noted that the temptation for Mr Heath to use this opportunity to embarrass the Government must be great. “As short-term tactics for the Opposition ”, “ The Times ” said, “ such a device must seem “ attractive, especially to those of its supporters who “ will expect from Mr Heath a belligerent approach “to politics. If it succeeded, by chance, in bringing “Mr Wilson and Mr Heath to the hustings “ prematurely, the Leader of the Opposition might “ consider whether he had really chosen the bravest “ banner to parade before the electorate ”. The “ Economist ”, which insisted that the first task of members is to make sure of getting the best man for a very difficult job, proposed that abstinence from voting should be confined to two—perhaps a Labour Speaker and a Conservative Deputy, thus taking one vote from each side. “If Mr Heath were to agree to “ this ”, the “ Economist ” said, “he would not be “ conceding very much ”,

However it is resolved, the problem seems certain to revive discussion about the position of the Speaker who, in the British Parliamentary tradition (to quote Sir Harry Hylton-Foster) “when he is “ elected to the Chair sacrifices his career, whatever “ it may have been, severs all connexion with any “ political party, and gives up all political activity ”. Not surprisingly, it is sometimes said that the Speaker’s constituency is in effect disfranchised. This is obviously undesirable; is it unavoidable? The question has been discussed before in Britain; a Select Committee in 1939 grappled with the problem and came to the conclusion that nothing much could be done about it. Further inquiry is likely to be a by-product of the present situation.