House of Commons Hansard Debates for 22 Jun 1995

Column 516

Question accordingly negatived.

Mrs. Ann Taylor (Dewsbury): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. It arises from the advice that you gave us a short time before the Division, when you said that the best way to proceed might be for the usual channels to have some discussions to see whether the Leader of the House was willing to make a statement. During the Division, such discussions did take place, but the Leader of the House indicated that he was not willing to make a statement because he regarded the resignation

Column 517

of the Prime Minister as leader of the Conservative party as nothing to do with this House. I do not think that the country as a whole will think that this is just a cosy matter for members of the Conservative party.

The matter raises some important questions about the workings of Parliament during the next few weeks. If the Prime Minister believes that he does not have the confidence of his own party, he clearly does not have the confidence of the House. There are questions for this House because we need to know with what authority Ministers will speak from the Dispatch Box. We need to know when Ministers are speaking as Ministers and when they are speaking as candidates in the Conservative party leadership election. We saw during the Division that several potential stalking horses were present. If we cannot--

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. This is now becoming a general debate, and the hon. Lady's point is not a matter of order for the Chair.

Mrs. Taylor: If we cannot have a statement from the Leader of the House because he refuses to give one, and if we cannot have a statement from the Prime Minister because he also refuses to give one, may we have a statement from the President of the Board of Trade?

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. The matter has been thrashed out exhaustively by means of points of order. There are no more points of order that I can deal with, and it is now my duty to ensure that the next business is considered.

Several hon. Members rose --

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. I am taking no more points of order on the Prime Minister's statement at his press conference. Several hon. Members rose --

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. I am not taking any more points of order. [Interruption.] Members must sit down.

Mr. Pike: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. [Interruption.] Mr. Pike, sit down.

Mr. Pike: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek your guidance on the Standing Orders of the House.

Madam Deputy Speaker: It must be a totally different matter. I am taking no more points of order on the Prime Minister's statement. Mr. Pike rose --

Madam Deputy Speaker: Is it a different point of order?

Mr. Pike: Yes, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek your guidance regarding the Standing Orders of the House. We have a procedure for debating urgent and important issues under Standing Order No. 20. Do you consider that this matter is urgent and important and should therefore be accepted for a debate under Standing Order No. 20?

Madam Deputy Speaker: Standing Order No. 20 cannot be used in the way in which the hon. Gentleman wishes.

Column 518

Mr. Max Madden (Bradford, West): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. A little while ago I received a letter from the Prime Minister's Parliamentary Private Secretary informing me that the Prime Minister would be unable to answer questions on Tuesday 27 June as he would be attending the European Council in Cannes. Quite apart from the prudence of the Prime Minister being out of Britain next week, may I ask whether you have received any indication that the Prime Minister has revised his plans and no longer intends to ask the Lord President of the Council to answer questions on his behalf next Tuesday?

Madam Deputy Speaker: That is not the responsibility of the Chair.

Several hon. Members rose --

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. I call Mr. Spearing, on what I trust will be a different point of order.

Mr. Nigel Spearing (Newham, South): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. When an unexpected matter of common knowledge arises which you regard as of sufficient significance, is it in order for an hon. Member to apply to you for permission to move the adjournment of the debate?

Madam Deputy Speaker: It is perfectly possible, but whether it is accepted by the Chair is another matter.

Mr. Spearing: Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. In that case, may I ask permission to move such a motion for the following reason? The stability of the Government of Her Majesty depends on the stability of the Privy Council and, in particular, on its sub-committee known as the Cabinet. The Prime Minister is First Lord of the Treasury, and in that role he discharges many duties, including that of attending the important conference of which my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, West (Mr. Madden) has acquainted the House. In view of the representational difficulties which may arise at that conference in the context of the full backing of the majority in the House, such as it is, for the conference and the carrying on of the business of the Queen's Government--

Mr. David Ashby (Leicestershire, North-West): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Mr. Spearing: I am on a point of order already.

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. If there is one thing that I cannot deal with, it is two points of order at the same time.

Mr. Spearing: It is clear from the points of order during our previous debate and subsequently that there is some uncertainty. Pending a statement from the Leader of the House, who ought to be here, has been requested to be here and has not said that he will make a statement, I beg leave to move such a motion.

Madam Deputy Speaker: I am prepared to grant it.

Mr. Spearing: I therefore move the Adjournment of the House to discuss--

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. Is it the hon. Gentleman's wish that the debate be now adjourned?

Mr. Spearing: I beg to move that the debate on this matter be adjourned pending a statement from the Leader

Column 519

of the House. If there is no such statement, the pros and cons of the uncertainty will not be laid before the House. Other hon. Members may wish to give reasons for the motion, such as the stability of the Government and the majority that they can command in the House being in question.

It is clear that the instability in the Government ranks is not sudden. It is as if a grumbling appendix has been worsening among Conservative Members for a number of weeks. The grumbling has caused a good deal of comment in the press and has affected not only the position of the Prime Minister; there is also a great deal of speculation about the position of the Foreign Secretary, who is due at the Cannes conference in a few days' time. Without some sort of stability between the Prime Minister, whoever he or she may be, and the Foreign Secretary, can Her Majesty's Government--still less the people of this country--be properly represented at that conference? The agenda at the Cannes conference is of prime constitutional importance. Yesterday there was a six-hour debate in the House about many of the issues to be raised at Cannes. The matters to be discussed are not dissociated from the divisions in the ranks of Government supporters--if they are indeed Government supporters-- [Interruption.]

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. May I have a little decorum and quiet?

Mr. Donald Anderson (Swansea, East): Will my hon. Friend bear it in mind that it is not just a matter of the Government's credibility in their external relations, because the hiatus that will persist over the next two weeks will have profound internal implications for the country and for the business of the House? For example, it may delay the Nolan committee which is considering allegations in respect of matters which are vital to hon. Members. One consequential if not intended effect must be that.

Mr. Spearing: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. The domestic consequences for legislation or what happens in the House is of prime importance to many citizens. Just a short while ago the Leader of the House announced next week's business. What guarantee can there be that that business will proceed? What guarantee have the general public that representations to their Members of Parliament over the weekend at their advice surgeries, in newspapers and in letters will be aired next week?

It is not unknown for Cabinets and Leaders of the House to change the business. We do not know whether the Leader of the House may be a candidate for leader of his party. Sponsors of certain legislation set down for next week might be thought to be enhancing themselves by an appearance at the Dispatch Box and could thus receive undue publicity. We just do not know.

Mr. Ashby: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Spearing: If the hon. Gentleman intends to ask further questions, I will gladly give way.

Mr. Ashby: In the light of the hon. Gentleman's views on Europe, does he not feel that he would be far safer in the hands of the present Prime Minister at the Cannes conference than in the hands of his leader, who would sell this country down the river?

Mr. Spearing: I do not think that the leadership of my party is in any way in question. The big question is the

Column 520

leadership of the Conservative party. I will therefore not be tempted down the beguiling road indicated by the hon. Gentleman. As we know from those who were present at yesterday's debate, if an objective observer--I stress the word "objective"--were to compare the stances of my hon. Friend the Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook) and that of the Foreign Secretary, who respectively outlined Opposition and Government policies in that debate, I am not too sure that the distinction would be that obvious. Therefore, the hon. Gentleman's point is irrelevant.

Central to the events of the past hour or so is the fact that the abscess which has apparently being growing and festering and which has now burst among the ranks of Conservative Members was started by the right hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Sir E. Heath). There was division in the Conservative party on that matter from the day I entered the House--25 years ago last Sunday. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), who entered the House on that same day, has ample evidence and full knowledge of that festering.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover): The Prime Minister said at his press conference that he had resigned as Tory party leader. That means that the Tory party is leaderless. The important thing to remember is that that is not enough. If the Prime Minister has lost the confidence of the governing party, he has a duty to go to the Queen and ask to be allowed to call a general election so that the country can decide. Does my hon. Friend agree that that is the only way out of this impasse?

Mr. Spearing: Constitutionally, my hon. Friend is absolutely right. I know of no reason why the Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Huntingdon (Mr. Major), if he so wishes, should not get into his motor car, go to see Her Majesty and seek a Dissolution. In the House we have to be careful about the Crown and I should not like to speculate about what Her Majesty would say. However, I suggest that the Prime Minister has been so mobbed, as it were, by differing views, so provoked and discomfited and, I would not say exhausted, but has had so much difficulty balancing the two views in his party that it is hard for him to carry on the business of government. Indeed, the fact that there have been two views has clearly interrupted the Prime Minister's efficiency in the conduct of government.

Dr. Robert Spink (Castle Point): Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Spearing: I shall give way later. I am answering my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner). The Prime Minister has been so discomfited that, like a person surrounded by bees or wasps, he has picked up his swatter and said, "Look, if you don't stop, I will go to Her Majesty and you can all go to the electorate."

Mr. Corbyn: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. In moving the motion, my hon. Friend has several times drawn attention to the situation of the Queen and the issue of whether the Prime Minister should go to her. What powers has the House to ask for an opinion from, or send a message to, the Queen as to exactly what she ought to do in this situation? Does this not illustrate the problem of having a monarch rather than an elected president to deal with such problems?

Column 521

Madam Deputy Speaker: I very much doubt whether Her Majesty needs the detailed advice of the House.

Several hon. Members rose --

Mr. Spearing: I give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover.

Mr. Skinner: I said that the Prime Minister had a duty to go to the Queen, but he had better wait another half an hour or so as she will not be back from Ascot yet.

Mr. Spearing: I wish to develop that point as it is of constitutional importance. If we were in the position of the monarch--you, Madam Deputy Speaker, as our No. 2 representative to the monarch can imagine the position--what would we see? Her Majesty would survey the broken state of the Conservative party.

Mr. Clive Soley (Hammersmith): Will my hon. Friend give way?

Mr. Spearing: I will give way in a moment.

Unlike the position with the left and right wings of Mr. Wilson's party, the Conservative party is unstable. The Queen might well say, looking at the opinion polls, that it was her duty to grant a Dissolution. It is not a matter on which it is for us to advise Her Majesty in the sense of giving a corporate view from the House, although it would be possible to move a suitable motion. It is a matter of the advice of the people in respect of the Government.

Mr. Tony Banks: My hon. Friend will note that the Conservative Benches are now denuded. Does he think that that is because Conservative Members are already outside laying their bets and doing their canvassing? In the circumstances, does that not support my hon. Friend's excellent motion and suggest that we should all go out and put a few bets on?

Mr. Spearing: Not yet, because we have yet to ventilate--and to a much greater extent than I have been yet been capable of--the plight not only of the Conservative party but of Her Majesty's Government and, therefore, the British people, who are currently leaderless.

Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North): My hon. Friend has referred to the position in respect of a general election. Constitutionally, that should of course take place in view of the Government's position. However, is my hon. Friend at all surprised that with the situation which exists in the country, with hardly a single Tory seat being held in by-elections, the Prime Minister simply refuses to go to the country because he knows what the result would be? Is that not a conspiracy against the British people to deny them the right to elect another Government? We should give them their democratic rights instead of going through the farce of the Prime Minister trying to save his job by having an internal election? What respect does he show to the House of Commons by refusing to come and make a statement?

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. I remind hon. Members in their excitement that they should be addressing me rather than other hon. Members.

Mr. Spearing: My hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) makes a fascinating speculation. I suspect that it is not a matter of disrespect but of desperation.

Column 522

I have more suggestions about what Conservative Members are doing. They are either grouping together around various of their right hon. Friends and getting their party leadership election machines ready, or perhaps they are hastening back to their constituencies for the very possibility that my hon. Friend mentioned.

Several hon. Members rose --

Mr. Spearing: I give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Mr. Mackinlay).

Mr. Mackinlay: Does my hon. Friend recall the statement a few moments ago by the Secretary of State for National Heritage, who strained to distinguish between the roles of Conservative leader and Prime Minister? Is it not fair to draw the attention of the House--and, indeed, your attention, Madam Deputy Speaker--to the fact that the announcement was made from No. 10 Downing street and not from Conservative central office? That illustrates and buttresses the fact that the Government always confuse the Conservative party and Britain when it suits them. When they find themselves in the mire, they try to make a distinction. For far too long the Government have tried to imply that the Conservative party represents Britain, but when it causes them embarrassment they try to make a distinction. The fact that the Prime Minister made his announcement in the grounds of No. 10 Downing street conflicts with the rules that he laid down for Ministers that such places are not to be used for party political purposes. He should have done it from central office. The fact that it was done in Downing street emphasises the fact that either he or the Leader of the House should be here to make a statement.

Mr. Spearing: I am grateful again for the constitutional suggestions of my hon. Friends. One of the purposes of debate in the House, all too frequently ignored, is that we gather together the totality of human knowledge and political wisdom and distil it in Hansard to be put on record for ever and aye.

Mr. Soley: Will my hon. Friend give way?

Mr. Spearing: My hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock is right. I recall that at the time of general elections our late right hon. Friend Lord Wilson, then Mr. Wilson, first went to the office of his party, which in those days was Transport house in Smith square. The problem for the Prime Minister has been demonstrated by certain constitutional matters relating to expenditure and responsibility for debt. The Conservatives cannot run their own party, let alone the country. Who and what is the Conservative party? So far as I can see, it is the single person of the Prime Minister. My hon. Friend was right to point out the constitutional anomaly whereby the chairman of the Conservative party is not elected by anyone but appointed by the Prime Minister. Perhaps the Prime Minister has been discomfited by the performance of his party chairman.

Dr. Spink rose --

Mr. Tony Banks: Give way to a lonely Tory.

Mr. Spearing: I see that the hon. Member for Castle Point (Dr. Spink) is anxious to intervene.

Dr. Spink: This is the poorest political performance that I have observed from the Labour party. The hon.

Column 523

Member is floundering as well as flannelling. The fact is that the Prime Minister has made a courageous move. It is a very clever move and one as a result of which he will win. It will give him the confidence to go on and to continue to run the country, deliver growth with low inflation and win the next election. The Opposition do not like it because their fox has been shot.

Mr. Spearing: The suggestion that I am floundering is very novel. I have been wonderfully sustained in my speech by my hon. Friends, which is more than can be said for the Prime Minister. I shall give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Hammersmith (Mr. Soley), who is my own Member of Parliament.

Mr. Soley: I have been seeking to help my hon. Friend on a constitutional matter. As I understand it, we do not need to trouble the Queen--she can stay at Ascot until the last train leaves. The matter depends on whether a majority can be commanded by the Prime Minister in the House. The proper route would have been for the Prime Minister to call for a vote of confidence here in the House, but his problem would then be that he would not know which way to vote.

Mr. Spearing: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The great difference between the Prime Minister and the leader of the Labour party is that the majority of the party in the country and in the House behind the Leader of the Opposition is massive compared with the divisions and splits among the Conservatives. One can only imagine the coming weeks in politics and the band-width of possibilities this weekend.

Dr. Norman A. Godman (Greenock and Port Glasgow): My question is prompted by the very fair-minded answer that I received from the Prime Minister today to a question about Brent Spar. My hon. Friend is a decent fair-minded man. Has he no sympathy whatever at a personal level for a tormented and distressed Prime Minister?

Mr. Spearing: My hon. Friend ingeniously ventilated the problem of Brent Spar during Prime Minister's Question Time this afternoon. Despite the cheers from the Conservatives, the affair is an enormous embarrassment to the Government. Had the Prime Minister got his way, or had he been wiser, environmental policies relating to the health of the sea would perhaps have been such that the Government would not have allowed such a terrible infection of the deep sea ever to be contemplated.

Mr. Corbyn: My hon. Friend will have heard the point of order that I raised a little while ago relating to the role of the monarch in these circumstances. The real problem is that the Prime Minister resigned as leader of the Conservative party and said that he will fight in the leadership election, but we, as elected representatives of the people, cannot set out constitutional guidelines about how things should be done. I suspect that the Government will try to manoeuvre the business of the House so that there can be no discussion.

If we had a head of state who was accountable to the elected representatives, there would have to be clear constitutional guidelines about whether we should have a general election or a vote of confidence, instead of matters being decided in the murky halls of power as they are at present.

Column 524

Mr. Spearing: The structure of power in this country rests--or should rest--entirely in the Chamber and the Lobbies on either side. I recall that when the last Government fell on a vote of confidence--by only one vote, but that was enough--Lord Callaghan, as he is now, sprang to the Dispatch Box and said that he was going to the palace tomorrow. That is what the Prime Minister should do now because he has lost the confidence of his party and the country.

Mrs. Alice Mahon (Halifax): Does my right hon. Friend remember that, during the visit of the G7 nations to Halifax, Nova Scotia, the Prime Minister responded to some questions by saying that he had a coalition Government? Does my hon. Friend think that there is a possibility that the Prime Minister might apply to join the Labour party?

Mr. Spearing: That is perhaps taking things a little far. Being a Londoner, and acquainted with south London, as is my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks)--we are both, of course, knowledgeable about east London--I have often noticed in the Prime Minister a certain understanding of and sympathy with ordinary people, which I do not always find in the party that he leads. I have a suspicion that some of his difficulties and some of the distrust that he has improperly attracted from members of his own party might be because, behind everything else, there is a lurking and, I would suggest, praiseworthy sensitivity to some of the things that ordinary people experience and which he has experienced but which all too few of his hon. Friends have experienced. I believe that the British public feel that strongly, but it has added to his difficulties.

Mr. Tony Banks: My hon. Friend is a well known constitutional expert and we appreciate his knowledge.

Mr. Ashby: Rubbish.

Mr. Banks: The hon. Gentleman knows a lot about rubbish, but nothing about the constitution.

The head of state usually calls on the leader of the party which commands a majority in the House to form a Government, but there is no longer a leader of the majority party. In those circumstances, would it not be up to the head of state to summon a Conservative Member whom she thought able to command a majority in the House? I understand that she is on her way back from Ascot; might she not at this very moment be contemplating sending for the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, who has already made an appearance?

Mr. Spearing: That is not merely a hypothetical question, but something with which we may have to deal in the next few days. It is possible for the Conservative party to have a quick election, but--

Mr. Gyles Brandreth (City of Chester): Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Spearing: Not yet--I want to finish this point.

Because of the lack of confidence, which has been clearly demonstrated by the events of today, it is possible that the Prime Minister might advise Her Majesty to send for Mr. X or someone else. It may have been forgotten but, not too many years ago--after the election in February 1974--there was a little conversation when the

Column 525

answer, given formally or informally, was, "Yes Madam, I will see if I can." That person then had to ascertain whether there was a majority.

I can imagine Her Majesty calling a certain right hon. Gentleman--it could be someone whom anyone here could name--but he might not be able to say at that stage, "Yes, Madam, I will" and then kiss hands, actually or metaphorically. That right hon. Gentleman would have to go to the Committee Room upstairs and see whether he could command a majority among the Conservatives. I am not sure whether any particular candidate--or, at least, any masculine candidate that I can think of--would necessarily be able to do so. If he could not, the House would have to be dissolved or--I have not yet worked out the mathematics of this--it might be possible that a combination of other parties would be more in a position to command consistent support, as happened with the Lib-Lab Government.

Mr. Frank Cook (Stockton, North): May I draw my hon. Friend back to the invitation tendered to him by my hon. Friend the Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman), who pleaded for sympathy for the Prime Minister because of the rebuff that he suffered from an oil company? Does my hon. Friend think that this gives a new meaning to the phrase, "Go Well, Go Shell"?

Mr. Spearing: Alas, the oil wells of the North sea did not let Britain go well despite the thousands of millions of pounds worth of oil that were gushing out of the North sea, as is the case with gas now. That gas is publicly owned although it may be privately distributed and pirated. As a maritime country, we should pay much greater attention to the well- being of our marine life, as my hon. Friend, with his knowledge and experience, will confirm. The disgraceful incident to which he refers is not a good example of a responsible attitude.

Mr. Brandreth: I am listening carefully as the hon. Gentleman manages to pack his two-minute speech into three quarters of an hour. Can he tell the House how his own reselection is going? Is he making any progress on that front?

Mr. Donald Anderson (Swansea, East): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Before my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, South (Mr. Spearing) winds up his speech on this unprecedented constitutional crisis, will you confirm the nature of the current proceedings? Is it the case that my hon. Friend is initiating a debate on the Adjournment which can continue until at least 10 pm so that the House can have an opportunity in the remainder of the evening to make its views felt on this unprecedented crisis?

Madam Deputy Speaker: The position is that the hon. Gentleman's hon. Friend is moving a motion that the current debate--not the House--be adjourned. That, of course, is debatable and could continue. It is not for me to say how long it might continue.

Mr. Madden: Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Presumably, if an application for a closure were made to you in the course of the debate, you would consider that matter. If you decided that the closure should be put, the House would be asked to vote on a closure motion. If that were carried, would it have the

Next Section

Home Page