§ Q4. Mr. Robert Cookeasked the Prime Minister whether he will provide an official residence for the Paymaster-General.
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir.
§ Mr. CookeWould it not be more convenient for all concerned if the Paymaster-General were to move in to Number 10 on a permanent residential basis?
§ The Prime MinisterI hope that the hon. Gentleman one day will get over this love-hate relationship for the Paymaster-General. I really think that he has now had a good run on this. He has not got very much out of it. I feel that the rather limited time available for Questions could be better used dealing with Questions which seek information in reply to which information is given, as with Question Number 2 this afternoon.
§ Mr. LiptonMay we now assume that the Prime Minister regards any further questions on this subject of the Paymaster-General as tedious, irrelevant, boring and more and more juvenile?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. I will—
§ Sir W. Bromley-DavenportOn a point of order. Some time ago, Mr. Speaker, you in your wisdom reproached me for using too many adjectives. The hon. Member for Brixton (Mr. Lipton) used four.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. and gallant Gentleman is right, except that I did not reprove him. I pointed out that a supplementary question containing unnecessary adjectives was actually out of order. I am of opinion that the same consideration applied to the question just asked by the hon. Member for Brixton (Mr. Lipton) and that it was out of order on another ground, but I thought that on the whole we could get on quicker if I left it alone.
§ The Prime MinisterAm I in order in answering it?
§ Mr. SpeakerIt excuses the Prime Minister from answering, unless he has a strong urge of an emotional character to do so.
§ Mr. WebsterAs the First Lord of the Admiralty now has no known function, would not the Admiralty building be appropriate for the Paymaster-General?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman will find, after that very clever supplementary Question, that it was dealt with a few weeks ago.