§ 08. Mr. Patrick Jenkinasked the Prime Minister who gave authority for the use of official car, registered number 919 CLD, on Friday 1st July to convey Professor T. Balogh and a lady from Hampstead to the West End of London; and why an official car was put at Professor Balogh's disposal on this occasion.
§ The Prime MinisterThe use of this car to bring Dr. Balogh to the Cabinet Office had been authorised under the normal rules governing the use of official cars. The lady who travelled in the car on this occasion was another member of the Cabinet Office staff, who travelled with him in order to discuss necessary official business.
§ Mr. JenkinWill the Prime Minister confirm—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I want to hear the supplementary question.
§ Mr. JenkinWill the Prime Minister confirm that there has been no change in the list of persons designated in a very long reply on 3rd December, 1951, by the then Prime Minister, Mr. Churchill, of the people who are entitled to use official cars for personal use on the grounds that they require police protection?
§ The Prime MinisterIf the hon. Gentleman had not withdrawn this morning the Question he had intended to put, he would have had a full answer to the effect that the rules regarding the use of official cars are exactly the same as those carried out by our predecessors. As for Dr. Balogh, as the House knows, he had a very severe heart attack last year— 869 [Interruption.] Hon. Members opposite, I know., are capable of sinking pretty low on occasion. In accordance with the rules, he was authorised to be brought into work by car. I suggest to the hon. Member, who boasted to the Press that he had followed this car around in his own car for mile after mile, that if his hobby is collecting motor car numbers he would be better employed consulting my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis), who could teach him a lot about numbers.
§ Mr. C. PannellIs the Prime Minister aware that it usually falls to the incoming Minister of Public Building and Works to look into this matter and advise the incoming Prime Minister? Will he accept my assurance that the rules under which we moved and under which the car was assigned were not at all different in the rake-over in 1964 from those of the last 13 years? Is he also aware that our conduct and control of cars will stand up very favourably compared with that of our predecessors? I state that from personal knowledge.
§ The Prime MinisterIt is a fact that my right hon. Friend did give me the advice required on these occasions. His advise was followed. There was no change in the practice which has been followed exactly by this Government as under the preceding one, but we have not used back-benchers to drive round London to spy on the situation.
§ Mr. Patrick Jenkinrose—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. A little quieter, please.
§ Mr. William HamiltonOn a point of order. Is it necessary to carry on with this squalid exercise?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I am afraid the House must leave the control of Questions to the Chair.
§ Mr. ShinwellFurther to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Would you not think it desirable in the circumstances that the Leader of the Opposition should repudiate his hon. Friend the Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Patrick Jenkin)?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The right hon. Gentleman is not without Parliamentary 870 experience and knows that that is not a point of order.
§ Mr. Patrick Jenkinrose—
§ Mr. ManuelGo back into the sewers.
§ Mr. JenkinWill the Prime Minister accept that, in the light of his reply, of course I withdraw any possible accusation of impropriety in this case? Will he also accept that, so far from following this car round the streets of London, my journey in this case happened to coincide with it but that it diverged when I took the direct route to this House?
§ The Prime MinisterI read the statement which the hon. Member rushed to make to the Press when he put this Question down and also his account of the particular journey he undertook on that occasion. I am sure the whole House will be glad to welcome his apology, which gives me the opportunity of saying that I believe it is contrary to the practice of this House for hon. Members to put down Questions attacking people who cannot defend themselves, but so long as there are any hon. Members left to follow that practice they will be answered with all the rigour of which we are capable.