§ 66. Sir R. W. Smithasked the Secretary of State for Scotland if his attention has been called to the fact that a purely advisory body in Scotland, which has no statutory authority, has been, and is being, designated the Council of State; and if he will take steps to see that this practice is discontinued in view of the fact that members of this body might easily be confounded with Councillors of State appointed under the Regency Acts.
§ The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Westwood)My right hon. Friend would refer the hon. Member to the explanatory statements made in reply to Questions by the hon. Member for East Aberdeen (Mr. Boothby) and the hon. and gallant Member for Daventry (Major Manningham-Buller) on 9th February and 25th January respectively, to which he has nothing to add.
§ Sir R. W. SmithIs it not a fact that the Minister himself referred to this conference as a "Council of State," in answer to the hon. Member for East Aberdeen (Mr. Boothby)?
§ Mr. WestwoodI did, but I also explained that "Council of State," used to describe the Advisory Council of ex-Secretaries, has no formal significance. It is merely a colloquialism to describe an admirable effort at achieving Scottish unity of purpose.
§ Mr. GallacherAre we not entitled to have a Council of State?
§ Sir R. W. SmithOwing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply I beg to give notice that I intend to raise this matter on the Adjournment.