HC Deb 20 February 1967 vol 741 cc1144-6
36. Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

asked the Lord President of the Council whether he has now made arrangements to ensure that only Ministerial statements of secondary importance are made at morning meetings of this honourable House.

Mr. Crossman

About the method of selection, I have nothing to add to the answer I gave to the supplementary question put by the right hon. Gentleman on the Business Statement on 9th February. It would seem from the interest shown that the House welcomes the double opportunity for statements.— [Vol. 740, cc. 1834–35.]

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the words quoted in the Question are the words that he himself used in the undertaking he gave to the House on 14th December? Is he aware that the Minister of Health has twice made statements of substantial importance, and does the right hon. Gentleman regard it as consistent with the duty he owes the House as its Leader to allow his colleagues to flout the undertaking he has given?

Mr. Crossman

That is a grossly misleading interpretation of what my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health did. In fact, I would put this to the right hon. Gentleman. I think that the fact that the statements were made in the mornings in these particular cases got them the publicity that I hoped it would, which gave them an extra importance. We should not underrate the advantage from the point of view of the House of having statements made then which would previously normally have been Written Answers without the right of supplementary questions. I think that this is just what happens, and that both statements made in the morning were statements which I intended should be made in the morning.

Mr. Kenneth Lewis

Is the Leader of the House aware that we had a further farcical situation this morning, with hardly anyone in the House at all—

Mr. Speaker

Order. This is a Question about Ministerial statements, and the hon. Member's supplementary question does not arise on this Question.

Mr. van Straubenzee

The Leader of the House says that the importance of these statements—taking, for example, the one on vehicles for the disabled—arose from the publicity subsequently given to them, but is not the importance of the statement surely immense to those involved?

Mr. Crossman

Of course, as I made clear to, I think, my right hon. Friend the Member for one of the Leeds constituencies who pointed out that from one point of view all statements are equally important, I thought that in the afternoons we ought to deal with the kind of statements which the House would resent being moved to the mornings, whereas in the mornings we could have a number of statements which have their own importance but which normally would have been in the form of Written Answers. I adhere to that view.

Mr. Kenneth Lewis

One a point of order, Mr. Speaker. With respect, when you stopped me putting my supplementary question to the Leader of the House I was about to discuss the statement which was made by the Minister of Health this morning—

Mr. Speaker

There was no statement made by the Minister of Health this morning—[HON. MEMBERS: "0h."] Order. He spoke in answer to a debate.

Mr. Lewis

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member is using up Question Time.

Mr. Lewis

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Minister may not have made a statement in fact, but he made use of the debate to make a statement.

Mr. Speaker

Order. That does not arise on this Question.