HC Deb 26 October 1943 vol 393 cc29-30
50. Mr. Molson

asked the Prime Minister why the Minister without Portfolio now answers Questions regarding the implementation of the Beveridge Report?

The Prime Minister

I am not aware that there has been any change of practice in this matter. I am always prepared to deal with Questions raising major issues of policy, but Questions relating to the Government's work on the Beveridge scheme as a whole as well as to particular parts of it not falling within the province of any existing Department—such as children's allowances—should continue to be addressed to my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister without Portfolio.

Mr. Molson

Is my right hon. Friend aware that on 22nd April last the Minister without Portfolio made it quite plain that he was only dealing with those particular matters which did not fall within the ambit of any particular Department? Would it not be more satisfactory to the House if answers were given by the Minister actually responsible and not by a stooge who talks to a brief?

The Prime Minister

I certainly am not prepared to answer a question couched in such very unseemly terms.

Mr. Shinwell

Might I ask, quite seriously and with no desire to offend at all, why the Minister without Portfolio answers Questions at all, as he seldom gives any satisfactory replies? Will the Prime Minister consider that we never get any satisfaction from the Minister without Portfolio and that it might be very much better and more appropriate to the circumstances if the Ministers responsible and with authority replied to the Questions?

The Prime Minister

The whole question of how His Majesty's Government should conduct their business is of course entirely under the control of the House, and many opportunities are offered by our cycle of Parliamentary Business when all these matters can be put to Debate, and if necessary to a Division, and His Majesty's Government welcome every desire on the part of the House to bring such matters to a head. I cannot add to this statement at all, in reply either to my hon. Friend or to the other hon. Member.

Mr. Shinwell

Would the Prime Minister appreciate that this is not a desire to be offensive to the Minister without Portfolio but that rather it is a recognition of his inability to deal with these Questions because he has not the requisite authority?

The Prime Minister

I quite accept my hon. Friend's statement that he did not intend to be offensive. I did not think he was.