HC Deb 08 November 1962 vol 666 cc1152-3
Q2. Mr. Hector Hughes

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that the nomenclatures of many Ministers are outmoded; and if he will consider taking steps to modernise them in such a way as to make them more descriptive of the work done by Ministers and the duties for which Ministers are responsible.

The Prime Minister

I am not sure what the hon. and learned Gentleman has in mind, but no doubt his supplementary question will disclose it.

Mr. Hughes

Does not the Prime Minister agree that it would be very much in the public interest to be frank and explicit about matters of this kind, and to avoid confusion? I can give him one instance, namely, the fact that the Lord Privy Seal masquerades in this House as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. We have no Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in this House. Would it not be much better to call the person who operates in that Department the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs? Another example is the President of the Board of Trade. There is no Board of Trade for him to preside over. That is an anomaly which I am sure he will agree is out of date. The third example is the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who is often confused in the public mind with the Lord Chancellor.

Mr. Marten

On a point of order. Will the hon. and learned Member repeat all that? I could not hear it.

Mr. Speaker

That is not exactly a point of order. Perhaps the hon. Member will be able to guess what it was about when he hears the answer.

The Prime Minister

I understand that some of the older offices of State have historical titles which it might be thought convenient to change. But there are arguments against doing so, unless such changes are connected with some reorganisations of functions. Some people feel that the title of Secretary of State for War is not an accurate one. If there were to be a change in the whole structure, that would be the moment for making changes, but I do not think that we need make them just for the sake of doing so.

Mr. J. T. Price

Is the Prime Minister aware that most hon. Members on this side of the House are more concerned about the state of mind of Ministers than the labels on their backs?