Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Howard of Lympne (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 8 December 2008. It occurred during Debate on Speaker's Committee on the Search of Offices on the Parliamentary Estate.


Speaker's Committee on the Search of Offices on the Parliamentary Estate

It is a privilege to follow the hon. Member for Thurrock (Andrew Mackinlay), and I entirely endorse what he said. I hope to be brief and I want to make just two points. First, I endorse what was said by my right hon. Friend the shadow Leader of the House, by the hon. Member for North Southwark and Bermondsey (Simon Hughes) and most eloquently by the right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife (Sir Menzies Campbell) about the differences between what Mr. Speaker said on Wednesday and what the Government motion provides for today. I do not need to go through the differences. The Government are inviting the House to overrule Mr. Speaker. That is the long and the short of it. What Mr. Speaker said on Wednesday about the terms of reference of the inquiry, its composition and its length was right, whereas the provisions of the Government motion are wrong. They seek to overrule Mr. Speaker, and I cannot recall an occasion when the independence of the Speaker and the independence of this House have been drawn into sharper focus. The House has an opportunity this afternoon to stand up for its liberties and independence. I hope that it will do so by voting for the amendment proposed by the right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife. My second point is that in his statement to the London Assembly last Wednesday, acting commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson said that the Metropolitan Police Service was called in by the Cabinet Office"β€œβ€œto investigate suspected criminal offences in relation to a substantial series of leaks from the Home Office potentially involving national security and the impeding of the efficient and effective conduct of government.””" I particularly want to draw the House's attention to that last phrase. So far as I am aware, it has never been a criminal offence to impede the efficient and effective conduct of government and nor should it be. I do not think that the police should have been called into investigate on that basis, and they should not have agreed to do so. I have written to Mr. Ian Johnston, the chief constable of the British Transport police who is carrying out an inquiry into the police's handling of the matter, and asked him to consider this point in his inquiry. I have written to the Minister in charge at the Cabinet Office to ask who in the Cabinet Office called in the police on that extraordinary basis and whether the Minister authorised or knew of that action.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
485 c280 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
House of Commons Powers of entry Police Powers Members Metropolitan Police Parliamentary privilege Offices Right of search Speaker Speaker's Committee on the Search of Offices on the Parliamentary Estate Department of Chamber and Committee Services Serjeant at Arms Directorate Green, Damian
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk