HC Deb 15 May 1969 vol 783 cc1645-7
Q9. Mr. Speed

asked the Prime Minister from what areas of the country representations were sent to him on the probable consequences of the reports of the Parliamentary Boundary Commissions.

The Prime Minister

I have nothing to add to my reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow) on 29th April.—[Vol. 782, c. 1155–7.]

Mr. Speed

Is the Prime Minister aware that the English Report has been with the Home Secretary for four weeks and the Scottish Report has been with the Secretary of State for Scotland for nearly three weeks? Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, on precedent, these Reports and the Orders in Council should be laid before Parliament as soon as possible? Would he speak to his right hon. Friends about the matter?

The Prime Minister

My right hon. Friend will treat this as a matter of urgency, as he is required to do. I know the hon. Gentleman's interest in this question—the great growth in his constituency, what he said the other night, and what he has written to the Home Secretary about it. Whether it affects his area or not, as I told the House on 17th April, the Report of the Red- cliffe-Maud Commission is expected almost immediately, and it will need to be studied in this connection.

Dr. Winstanley

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that one of the consequences of not implementing the Boundary Commission's recommendations before the next General Election would be that, after the election, five hon. Members would have to represent constituencies with electoral rolls considerably in excess of 100,000? Since the national average is about 50,000, is not this a contradiction of the democratic processes?

The Prime Minister

This point, to gether with the correlated point on very small constituencies, is obviously one of the most relevant features in the situation. As I have said, the Reports must be studied, but my right hon. Friend will make a statement when he can.

Mr. Hogg

Since it is the Home Secretary's statutory duty to act as soon as practicable, cannot we have a date?

The Prime Minister

I referred to my right hon. Friend's duty. I said that he would wish to do this and that it was his statutory duty to do it. He cannot give a date, but he will do it as quickly as possible. The right hon. and learned Member for St. Marylebone (Mr. Hogg) will be aware not only of the complexity of the Reports but about the relevance of perhaps wide and far-reaching local authority boundary changes.

Mr. Heath

Two points arise. The Prime Minister says that the Act lays the duty on the Home Secretary. That has no relationship whatever to any Report of any Royal Commission. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that last Thursday the Leader of the House enunciated the doctrine that they should be kept until all three could be laid together. This is not in accordance with the Act, which places on the Home Secretary the duty of laying a Boundary Commission Report as soon as may be when it is received. When will the Home Secretary carry out his duty under the Act?

The Prime Minister

My right hon. Friend answered a Question on this on Monday. He has this duty. The right hon. Gentleman is perfectly fair. My right hon. Friend must not merely publish but report as soon as may be on his findings, and this he will do. Although it may be convenient for the House to have the three together, my right hon. Friend is not required to hold up one for the other two, and he has no intention of doing so.

Mr. Heath

It is much more than a question of his not being required to hold them up. He is required to lay them individually as they are received. Will the Home Secretary do this?

The Prime Minister

I said that my right hon. Friend is considering them and will lay them and will certainly not hold up one for the publication of another. He is required to consider them; he is considering them. The right hon. Gentleman would want that to happen. That is what is happening.