§ 28. Earl Wintertonasked the Minister of Health why an application made by Mr. Giles of Blackbridge Lane, Horsham, for permission to erect a bungalow in place of the hut which he occupies at present has been refused by his Department despite support of the application by the Horsham Urban District Council and the Medical Officer of Health for West Sussex, based on the insanitary condition of the hut and the health of the applicant.
§ 31. Major Tufton Beamishasked the Minister of Health whether he will give authority to the Seaford Urban District Council to issue a licence in order to enable a private firm of builders to build a house in the case of which he was sent details on 21st April by the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Lewes; and whether he is aware that this case is typical of many others throughout the country.
§ 67. Brigadier Headasked the Minister of Health why an application for a building licence from Mrs. Ratley, of 3, Wink-worth Road, Banstead, whose husband is suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis and is now living in and has so far only been offered inadequate accommodation has been turned down; and whether, bearing in mind that the refusal of this permit is likely to cause further serious deterioration in Mr. Ratley's health, he will now reconsider his decision.
§ The Minister of Health (Mr. Aneurin Bevan)I will, with permission, answer Questions Nos. 28, 31 and 67 together. I am making inquiries into the possibility of making some relaxation in the conditions under which licences are given. I hope to make a statement in connection with the review of the housing programme in June.
§ Major BeamishOn a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. My Question, No. 31, referred to an invididual case. How is it possible for the Minister to answer that with other Questions?
§ Mr. BevanThe Question of the noble Lord also refers to an individual case but all the Questions belong to the same category of cases.
§ Major BeamishAre we not entitled to put a Question about an individual case? 1436 When we do, it should not be taken together with other individual cases.
§ Mr. BevanThe Questions refer to applications for licences to build houses either to sell or to occupy, and it was in connection with that that my answer was given.
§ Brigadier HeadMy Question, No. 67, refers to the case of somebody who wants to build a house. Unless he can get a house the chance of his health further deteriorating will be very great.
§ Mr. BevanSo will the health of a large number of tenants who might not be able to get houses on councils' lists because other people with money can build houses to sell.
§ Mr. MarplesCan the right hon. Gentleman say when he will make his announcement? Will it be at the beginning or end of June?
§ Mr. BevanI can assure the House that it will be as soon as possible, because I am hoping that I shall be able to announce some relaxation.
§ Brigadier HeadIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the insinuation he made against my constituent was most unfair? In this case it is not a question of money, but of health. Surely, the right hon. Gentleman has done enough against the health of the country without doing this.
§ Brigadier PetoOn a point of Order. Is it not only with a Member's permission, Sir, that his Question can be answered with other Questions.
§ Mr. SpeakerIf the Member declines to give permission it means repeating the answer originally given, which would be rather a waste of the time of the House.
§ Major BeamishFurther to that point of Order. Is the Minister aware that I did not give my permission for the Minister to answer Question No. 31 with another Question.
§ Mr. SpeakerIt is also possible that having heard that the Question has been answered before I might not call it again.
§ Later—
§ Major BeamishMay I ask Question No. 31, Sir.
§ Major BeamishIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the person referred to in Question No. 31 gave the best years of his life to his country while serving in an unpleasant climate, overseas? Is not the political spite of the right hon. Gentleman intolerable?
§ Mr. SpeakerI wish hon. Members, instead of saying "Hear, hear," would read Erskine May, where they would see that imputations and insinuations are not allowed. As they would not, therefore, be allowed on the Order Paper they should not be said in supplementary questions.
§ Brigadier HeadOn a point of Order. As I understand your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, Question No. 67 is not yet answered. May I, therefore, have that answer?
§ Mr. SpeakerI did not rule that way. I understand that the Question has been answered with another Question and that the hon. and gallant Gentleman asked a couple of supplementaries on it. If he had asked no supplementaries on it, it might have been another matter. After all, one cannot have it both ways.