§ Q7. Mr. Bakerasked the Prime Minister when he now expects to receive the reports of the Royal Commission on Local Government.
§ The Prime MinisterTowards the end of 1968, Sir.
§ Mr. BakerIn view of the large amount of current legislation which impinges, in particular, on local government, will the Prime Minister consider asking the Royal Commission to produce an interim report so that hon. Member and others outside the House may have a chance to view the new legislation in that context?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman is right to stress the importance of the work of the Royal Commission with the ever growing volume of work, wel- 302 fare and otherwise, which falls to the local authorities. But this must be a thorough review. Many of us feel that its establishment was long overdue. It has now been set up. It has already received written evidence from nearly 2,000 witnesses, and it is in the middle of taking oral evidence. It would be wrong for us to put undue pressure on the Royal Commission for a speedy report before it was properly considered. The question whether it might produce an interim report must be a matter for the Commission itself.
§ Mr. HeathIn the light of what the Prime Minister has just said about the time, naturally, to be taken by the Royal Commission, and, presumably, legislation which will follow it, will he give a categorical assurance that he will not use the time factor in the making of recommendations by the Royal Commission on Local Government as an excuse for delaying implementation of the recommendations of the Parliamentary Boundaries Commission?
§ The Prime MinisterThat is an entirely separate question. This Question refers to the reports of the Royal Commission on Local Government. If the right hon. Gentleman would like to have a Question answered on the other matter—I know his difficulty in putting Questions down himself—perhaps he will arrange for one to be put down for answer by my right hon. Friend.
§ Mr. HeathAs the Prime Minister says that they are separate questions, will he confirm that there will be no connection between this and the implementation of the recommendations of the Parliamentary Boundaries Commission?
§ The Prime MinisterI am not prepared to make any statement on this subject—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—until the matter has been fully considered by the Government and, of course, in discussion with other parties.
§ Mr. HeathThe country can now see clearly the reason for the London Government Bill last year and why the Prime Minister did not want the London borough elections to come next month. Does he realise that the two answers which he has just given will arouse the gravest suspicions in the country about 303 the constitutional propriety of his future actions?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman is welcome to any suspicions he cares to harbour. He is entitled to enjoy what has happened in local government and the G.L.C. for as long as he wants, though remembering—as he is now trying to relate local government elections to Parliamentary elections—our success in sweeping the counties and the boroughs in 1958 and the fact that his party then doubled its majority only 18 months later. I hope that he will enjoy his fun while he can.
Mr. Bob BrownIs my right hon. Friend aware of the grave disquiet in the greater Tyneside area as a result of the long delay of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government in announcing a decision? Will he seek to expedite the decision on the Tyneside review area?
§ The Prime MinisterWe have made clear that in appropriate cases there is no reason why decisions should not be taken ahead of the Royal Commission's report. My right hon. Friend is giving thought to that particular case.
§ Mr. HefferIs it not clear to my right hon. Friend that the London Government Act, 1963 was designed, apart from any temporary setback, to give the Conservatives a built-in majority?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The Question is about the Royal Commission on Local Government.
§ Mr. HefferIf by some mischance the Royal Commission should come up with such biased recommendations will my right hon. Friend ignore them?
§ The Prime MinisterMy hon. Friend will be aware that the Royal Commission's terms of reference did not extend to the London area, which was the subject of legislation some years ago. While the view was expressed very strongly from our side, in both Houses, that the design was to secure a set-up which, in all but a very abnormal year, would lead to a Conservative majority, it is only fair to say that no one really thought that it ought to go this far.
§ Sir G. NabarroWould the Prime Minister confirm that his earlier Answers 304 are properly to be interpreted as a complete disavowal of gerrymandering on his part?
§ The Prime MinisterI thought that I made it clear that the suggestions of gerrymandering related to the Question I have just answered, and the Parliamentary boundaries are an entirely separate Question. There are many points to be considered. Certainly no decision has been taken on that matter and it is a separate question from the one I was answering.