§ Q8. Mr. John Hallasked the Prime Minister whether he will now review the procedure for custody and publication of Cabinet Papers, and revise the classification of such papers.
§ Q9. Mr. Biggs-Davisonasked the Prime Minister whether he will now review the procedure for custody and publication of Cabinet papers, and revise the classification of such papers.
§ Q10. Sir F. Bennettasked the Prime Minister whether he will now review the procedure for custody and publication of Cabinet papers, and revise the classification of such papers.
§ The Prime MinisterI am not aware of a need for such a review.
§ Mr. HallDoes my right hon. Friend agree that recent references in both memoirs and speeches would seem to indicate a lack of understanding of the present procedure or else that the present procedure does not work? In these circumstances, is not this procedure due for review?
§ The Prime MinisterAs far as my responsibilities go, the arrangements for the custody and publication of Cabinet papers and their classification are satisfactory. It is for the Prime Minister of the day to deal with classification during his period of office.
§ Mr. Biggs-Davison rose—
§ Mr. WellbelovedOn a point of order. I am reluctant to intervene, but may I draw your attention, Mr. Speaker, to the fact that Questions Nos. Q8, Q9, 010 and 017 are identical and that Questions Nos. Q14, 015, 016 and 011 are identical? This is clearly a ploy originated in the Smoke Room and is a gross abuse 236 and complete waste of Question Time. Is it right that the Table Office should have accepted these identical Questions? If the rules provide for the Table Office to accept them, may I ask you, Sir, to consider this gross abuse of Parliamentary privilege and to give a Ruling tomorrow that it should not happen?
§ Mr. SpeakerThat point had already occurred to me in relation to Questions Nos. Q1 and Q2. However, it is a serious point and I will consider it.
§ Mr. C. PannellFurther to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Will you, Sir, look up the precedent of Mr. Speaker Morrison concerning equal pay for women, when he took a very stern line against an attempted conspiracy which appeared on the Order Paper? As I was one of those affected, I speak with some feeling. What was good enough in that case is good enough today.
§ Mr. WellbelovedFurther to the point of order. The Questions to which I referred originated in the Smoke Room. The two Questions to which you, Mr. Speaker, referred, originated in the Tea Room.
§ Mr. SpeakerI will consider all these important matters.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. We have very important business to do today. I have promised to consider the matter.
§ Dr. GilbertFurther to the point of order. I hope that you are not suggesting, Mr. Speaker, that there has been any collusion in the setting down of Questions Nos. Q1 and Q2?
§ Mr. SpeakerI have not suggested anything.
§ Mr. Faulds rose—
§ Mr. FauldsYou bloody well listen.
§ Mr. SpeakerI did not quite hear what the hon. Gentleman said, but technically he was addressing me and I am listening.
§ Mr. FauldsI am very relieved to know that you are slightly deaf, Mr. Speaker. May I raise a point of order with you? With great respect, there seemed to me some indecent haste to 237 get to Question No. Q8 and the block of Questions following it when there was not a supplementary question allowed on Question No. Q7, which deals with a rather important matter, apart from that put by the hon. Member who originated the Question.
§ Mr. SpeakerI have received advice recently from the House about calling hon. Members to ask supplementary questions. My view of the Prime Minister's reply to Question No. Q7 was that no profitable supplementary question could be asked at this stage because he said that we would inform the House when there was anything to tell the House. I then went on to Questions Nos. Q8, Q9 and Q10, not attributing motives or realising where they originated.
§ Mr. FauldsFurther to the point of order. How can you, Mr. Speaker, say whether a supplementary question will be profitable until you have heard it? I happened to have a profitable supplementary question to ask.
§ Mr. SpeakerIf that rule applied, everybody would ask innumerable supplementary questions. It is for the Chair to decide these matters.
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonMay I ask my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister whether the right hon. Member for Leeds, East (Mr. Healey) will be given the same facilities as the right hon. Member for Coventry, East (Mr. Crossman) to consult Cabinet papers so that when he in his turn comes to write his memoirs he can explain his advocacy, with Lord George-Brown, of the sale of arms to South Africa?
§ The Prime MinisterThere is a longstanding convention that members of an Administration have access to certain documents. This is always arranged directly with the Secretary to the Cabinet.
§ Sir F. BennettCan my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister say, as a matter of factual answer, whether tapes or other records of telephone conversations outside the Cabinet between Cabinet Ministers are subject to the same rules about confidence as apply to Cabinet procedures themselves?
§ The Prime MinisterI have been discussing entirely the matter of Cabinet documents and Cabinet records. I have 238 no knowledge of tapes or of taped telephone recordings.
§ Mr. BidwellCan the Prime Minister say whether any of the papers disclose the date when he will cease to blame the previous Government for the inflationary mess that he is in?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not think that has any relationship to the Questions with which we are dealing.