45. Mr. Pannedasked the Prime Minister if he will give a direction to the Parliamentary Secretaries concerned that no Government or Departmental duties must take precedence over their duties as Members of this House.
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Member has been good enough to let me know that his Question refers to the meeting of Standing Committee B last Wednesday, when the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government was absent because of an engagement concerning his Department.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport was, however, present to speak on behalf of the Government. He was misinformed as to the reason for his colleague's absence, but the latter had made his reason for not attending the Committee known to the hon. and learned Member for Kettering (Mr. Mitchison), who was in charge of the Bill.
All Members of the Government are, of course, aware of their responsibilities both to Parliament and to their Departments. It is certainly customary for Ministers to give precedence to their Parliamentary business.
Mr. PannedCan I accept the Prime Minister's implied apology for the absence of the Ministers concerned? Will he not agree that the reason why the Parliamentary Secretary and the Minister were absent from a Private Member's Bill, which, after all, had Clauses sponsored on behalf of the Department, was that they were being rehearsed for a television performance? Will the Prime Minister say whether that is a matter of public duty concerned specifically with their Department?
§ The Prime MinisterThat is covered by my general observations. It is certainly customary for Ministers to give precedence to their Parliamentary duties. That does not exclude the transfer of responsibility within the Department or even, in extreme cases, from one Department to another.
§ Mr. P. RobertsIs it not a fact that on the following day, on this Opposition Private Member's Bill, the proceedings could not start because there was not a quorum and that, later, it had to stop because there was not a quorum; that the hon. Gentleman who asked this Question is a Member of that Committee and that he was not there on that day from the start to the finish?
Mr. PannedI had paired with the hon. Member for Croydon, East (Sir H. Williams) by private arrangement on that day. There cannot be any comparisons between the obligations of Private Members, who are in receipt of £1,000 a year, and the obligations of Ministers who are responsible for a Bill—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. We are getting a long way from the original Question.