§ 51. Miss WILKINSONasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury on what grounds the Controller of the Stationery Office has refused the request of the North Eastern Development Board to have samples of work required on view in Newcastle-on-Tyne, so as to facilitate the tendering for work by firms in the distressed areas of the North East?
§ Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLEI would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Storey) on 16th December. The difficulties in the way of accepting the proposal of the North East Development Board are explained in correspondence between the Stationery Office and the Board, of which I am sending a copy to the hon. Member.
§ Miss WILKINSONMay I ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman whether the statement of the Stationery Office in the correspondence that they already have sufficient firms on their list for tendering is not in direct contradiction of the statement of the Prime Minister that it was desired, all things being equal, to give preference to the distressed areas?
§ Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLEI think the hon. Member must be referring to a different correspondence from that which I propose to send to her.
§ Miss WILKINSONMay I then ask, it being the fact that the Stationery Office have said that, whether the policy of the Department is not therefore in direct conflict with the policy indicated by the Prime Minister when he said that, other things being equal, a preference Would be given to the distressed areas?
§ Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLEI cannot accept the hon. Member's statement as being accurate that, the Stationery Office will not go outside the firms on their present list.
§ Miss WILKINSONOn a point of Order. The Minister has said that he does not accept my statement as being accurate. May I point out that it is a quotation from a correspondence between his Department and the North Eastern Development Board?
§ Miss WILKINSONOn a further point of Order. With very great respect, may I ask whether it is in order for a Minister to say directly to a Member that he does not accept a statement made by that Member although the authority for that statement is in a communication from the Minister's own Department?