asked the Attorney-General whether his consent has to be obtained before civil servants threaten or institute legal proceedings for libel or slander against Members of this honourable House in matters arising out of or in the course of their employment as civil servants.

No, Sir.

On a point of order. Is not Question No. 35 purely hypothetical? Should it appear on the Order Paper at all?

I will not rule upon whether a Question is hypothetical.

Would not the learned Solicitor-General think it wise if such a procedure were to apply, since there is a very narrow line in this respect in regard to the activities of hon. Members of this House in the course of their duties, and particularly those hon. Members who do not have legal training and who therefore are unable to stand up to any such threats which they might receive?

In a case where it was alleged that an hon. Member of this House had defamed a civil servant, the matter normally would be referred to his departmental legal advisers and, if necessary, they would consult the Law Officers. I do not feel disposed to go beyond that.

Will my hon. and learned Friend clear up this matter—for me, at any rate, if not for others? Does that mean that a civil servant can sue an hon. Member for libel over any statement made in this Chamber? Surely that is a matter of privilege,

A statement made in this Chamber is a matter of privilege. Generally speaking, it must be fully recognised that a civil servant is entitled to his remedy in the courts in the same way as an ordinary individual.