§ 4. Mr. Langford-Holtasked the Minister of Labour why no reply has been sent to the National Union of Students in answer to their letter to his Department asking for details of the conditions imposed by him on students wishing to enter the United Kingdom to become domestic helps; and when the union can expect a reply giving the information they seek.
§ Mr. Langford-HoltBefore the right hon. Gentleman replies, may I say that I originally put down this Question to the Home Office, against which Department the discourtesy implied in the Question was directed?
§ Mr. Iain MacleodI am much obliged to my hon. Friend. The original letter also was addressed in equal error to the Home Office and ended up with me.
The following is the reply to the Question:
I much regret this delay, but a reply giving the information required was sent on Wednesday, 15th February.
§ Mr. Langford-HoltIs my right hon. Friend aware that, despite the fact that this letter had to be forwarded, despite the fact that this Question was put down on the Order Paper of this House, it took four weeks for a reply to be given, and that that was a week after the notice had been given of the Question? Could he, as a matter of courtesy to the public—who, after all, are entitled to address letters to the Department—please see that that sort of procedure is speeded up?
§ Mr. MacleodYes, indeed. I said that I very much regretted the delay. I have looked into the average time taken to reply to these matters, and it is about one week, which I think is reasonably satisfactory.