HC Deb 22 February 1971 vol 812 cc51-2
Mr. Dell

On a point of order. Last Thursday the Prime Minister said: The fact that these special arrangements"— regarding special development areas— involve another £25 million expenditure will put them in a more advantageous position than they were at that time."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 18th Feb., 1971; Vol. 811, c. 2256] "That time" was that before 27th October, 1970.

Since this statement was made by the Prime Minister there have been reports in the Press that the Prime Minister made a mistake. Evidently, under pressure from this side of the House, he read the wrong figure out of his notes. I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that if statements of this sort, which are important, are to be corrected, they should be corrected by personal statements in this House, and not by means of leaks in newspapers. May I, therefore, ask you whether you have received from the Prime Minister any request to make a personal statement?

The Prime Minister

Further to that point of order. Perhaps I may be allowed to deal straightaway with the point which has been understandably raised by the right hon. Gentleman.

I pointed out in my speech that the differential benefit of free depreciation and increased assistance under the Local Employment Acts is, broadly speaking, equal to what was being provided by other means by the last Government."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 18th Feb., 1971; Vol. 811, c. 2256.] I then went on to use the sentence which the right hon. Gentleman has read out.

I should have made it plain that these new arrangements, when fully effective, are estimated to cost an additional £10 million in a full year, for the special development areas alone, over and above the expenditure of £25 million for the development areas generally, estimated to arise in a full year from the increase in assistance under the Local Employment Acts announced last October.

I much regret, and I apologise for, any misunderstanding which I may have created.

Mr. Dell

Further to that point of order. I am, of course, grateful to the Prime Minister for correcting that statement and indicating that the figure of £25 million estimate should have been £10 million. But he made two statements; one was about the figure, and the other was that this was putting them in a more advantageous position than they were at that time. Was the right hon. Gentleman correcting that statement as well?

The Prime Minister

No. That statement remains, for the reason I have explained in my further statement.