HC Deb 26 November 1962 vol 668 cc42-3
Mr. Farr

With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a personal statement.

Last Thursday, after Questions, the hon. Member for Gloucestershire, West (Mr. Loughlin) raised on a point of order a remark alleged by him to have been made by me on Wednesday night, and drew attention to the fact that this remark had been altered in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I am sorry that I was not in the House at that time on Thursday. In fact, I had been at home all morning and fully available by telephone either to the hon. Member or to anyone else who might have required my presence in the House or to make an inquiry as to the facts.

The facts of the matter are these: on the night in question I intended to say, and was under the impression that I had, in fact, said, that I had received three letters from constituents of the hon. Member for Gloucestershire, West, who, apparently, had not appealed to him for assistance. When I went up to check my speech with the reporters, as is the usual custom, I found that the report did not contain the word "not". I assumed that this was simply a stenographical error and, therefore, made the correction. In doing this I did not make any change in the words which I believed that I had spoken.

The letters which I referred to were some of the very large number which I had received in reply to a letter of mine which has just been published in a national magazine, the Shooting Times.

As a consequence these replies were addressed to me and to no other hon. Member of the House.

Whether my correction should have been accepted is a matter for you, Mr. Speaker. The words reported in column 1303 of the OFFICIAL REPORT on 21st November do most certainly contain the sense of what I wished to say. I intended no reflection on the hon. Member for Gloucestershire, West and I ask him to accept my assurance that any such reflection was quite contrary to my purpose.

Mr. C. Pannell

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. A personal statement by an hon. Member is, of course, not subject to any debate. But will you look again at what you said on Thursday afternoon, when you said that you had tried to trace the hon. Member for Harborough (Mr. Farr) during the day? There is a direct conflict between your efforts and his statement now, which, I think, ought to be cleared up.

Mr. Speaker

I do not propose to pursue the matter further.