Mr Tom Driberg: There were two phrases worth recalling in the
Mr Tom Driberg: May I, with great respect, Mr. Speaker, ask you to keep reasonably flexible the Ruling that you have just given? Surely a Private Notice Question must be considered by the Chair on the merits or importance of the subject of the Question and not only whether it will attract a number of supplementary questions. Is not that so?
Mr Tom Driberg: Before the right hon. Gentleman sits down, will he say why he considers it right that no legal representation should be allowed to the appellants?
Mr Tom Driberg: Further to that point of order. Would it not be easier to discuss only the Amendments which have been made if the hon. Member in charge of the Bill, the hon. Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Wood- nutt), had opened the debate by indicating what they were?
Mr Tom Driberg: Did I hear you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, say that the Bill has not been amended or that there are not any Amendments—because the Bill says, "As amended in Committee"?
Mr Tom Driberg: I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman was present on Second Reading, but if he was not he will have read the debate in HANSARD. He will know that several hon. Members on both sides of the House—not only opponents of the Bill—said that this matter should be dealt with in a public Bill. The Minister who replied suggested vaguely that the Government would consider whether there should...
Mr Tom Driberg: I hope that my hon. Friend is not going quite as far as the hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Mr. Gurden), who seems to be suggesting that, therefore, we in this House tonight have no right to utter a word or comment upon the findings of the Committee. Sometimes the House rejects the recommendations of a Select Committee.
Mr Tom Driberg: Since the hon. Gentleman challenges us, may I point out that there is a slight difference between a crowded urban area and a rural area.
Mr Tom Driberg: The hon. Gentleman said that the report from the Home Office dealt with three Clauses about which the Government were worried and that two of the recommendations on Clauses 8 and 26, had been accepted. But Clause 5 is a very long Clause, so he may not be right to say that the greater part has been accepted.
Mr Tom Driberg: It is not.
Mr Tom Driberg: The hon. Member for the Isle of Wight (Mr. Woodnutt) is an alderman of the county council, so naturally lie is for the Bill.
Mr Tom Driberg: The hon. Gentleman will recall that on Second Reading when I made that perhaps exaggerated remark about hatred of the youth, it was provoked by the tremendous chorus of approval of hon. Members opposite. Although the hon. Gentleman said that the Bill was not intended to kill pop festivals altogether, when I said that it would have that effect, great shouts of "Hear, hear" and "Good" came from...
Mr Tom Driberg: He will be in charge of it.
Mr Tom Driberg: We were extremely interested to learn that Lord Blyton, for whom we all have affection, as the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight (Mr. Woodnutt) said, is to steer the Bill through the other place, or as much of the other place as he can command. There are different procedures in the other place. The hon. Gentleman is not "in charge" of the Bill here. Although he introduced it, he is not...
Mr Tom Driberg: I am obliged for that correction, but I do not see that it affects the argument, because he is presumably a qualified doctor. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman is also a qualified doctor. At any rate, a qualified doctor would not say that the health risks had been greatly exaggerated if, in his qualified opinion, they had not been.
Mr Tom Driberg: I am obliged to my hon. Friend. Until the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight corrected me, I had confused the two medical officers of health, but do I take it that there was no great public dispute between them?
Mr Tom Driberg: Did they do so publicly?
Mr Tom Driberg: I will not pursue the point.
Mr Tom Driberg: I think that precautionary measures were taken last year. Otherwise there might have been some health risk. But we are assured by one medical officer of health that the health risk was greatly exaggerated—exaggerated by those who are, no doubt, using that as an argument against the festival. That is the main point. There is then the other point raised by the hon. Gentleman and touched upon...
Mr Tom Driberg: I shall not go into that question, because it is not strictly relevant to the Bill. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for mentioning it, but not for introducing it at this point. It is an important matter, but another matter. As for being commercial, that is part of the society in which we live; it applies to every place of entertainment—to every theatre and cinema in the land. Let us hear...