HC Deb 19 November 1974 vol 881 cc1094-8
Ql. Mr. Dalyell

asked the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to Orkney.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Wilson)

I have at present no plans to visit Orkney, but I hope to visit Scotland again soon.

Mr. Dalyell

In any discussion of devolution, can the pledge of the Scottish National Party be borne in mind that the electors of Orkney—all 13,103 of them—should have a mini-parliament of their own? Does it not follow that the Beryl and Piper fields are Orkney oil?

The Prime Minister

There is no ministerial responsibility for statements made by the Scottish National Party, although I understand that the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond) has made his own comments on these proposals. The Government's position on devolution is clear. We are opposed to separatism and intend to implement the proposals set out in the White Paper we published in September.

Mr. Grimond

We are disappointed that the Prime Minister will not be visiting Orkney but will contain ourselves in patience. When he does come, will he see the farmers, because it is far more important that the Government should do something for agriculture than that they should dally with curious promises made either by the Scottish National Party or by certain members of the Labour Party?

The Prime Minister

The right hon. Gentleman has raised a very important point, which relates also to other parts of the country. I remind him that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture is in Brussels today fighting for the interests of all our farmers. When I am able to visit Orkney I shall want to study the right hon. Gentleman's own proposals, since I gather that he has suggested not only that the island community should have a system similar to that enjoyed by the Faroes but that Orkney and Shetland should then have the right to take two-thirds of what he calls Scottish oil.

Mrs. Winifred Ewing

Does the right hon. Gentleman take his view of the policy of the Scottish National Party from the hon. Member for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell) or from those Members better qualified to say what the policy of the Scottish National Party is? Will he say quite frankly to the world whether he thinks there is anything undignified in the policy of the Scottish National Party with regard to those distinctive islands—which in many respects genuinely feel themselves to be distinctive—which is simply that they can have as much autonomy as they wish? If the Prime Minister—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Lady has asked two supplementary quesions.

Mrs. Ewing

Does—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I have said that that is enough.

Mrs. Ewing

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. If I—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I will take the point of order at the end of Question Time.

The Prime Minister

The hon. Lady asked me when attributing words to the Scottish Nationalist Party only to attribute those which could authoritatively—

Mrs. Ewing

The right hon. Gentleman has got the wrong name.

The Prime Minister

Yes, I am very sorry about that. Had the hon. Lady made the position clear, I would have been glad to have accepted it from her. I was merely referring to a statement by Mr. William Wolfe quoted in The Scotsman as saying that the SNP had been committed since 1968 to giving large measures of devolution to island communities, similar to the system in the Faroes". I hope I quoted that correctly.

Mrs. Ewing

If they wish it.

The Prime Minister

That is a nice addition. I will take it. When the hon. Lady widens it to the whole question of our attitude to island communities, it is an important point and it should be studied. I only hope that the Isles of Scilly will not declare UDI on the strength of her advocacy.

Mr. Fell

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

I will take the hon. Member's point of order at the end of Question Time.

Mr. Fell

rose

Mr. Speaker

I must ask the hon. Member to be reasonable. We have so far taken about five or six minutes over one Question. There has already been one point of order which I have suggested should not be taken until the end of Questions.

Mr. Fell

I wish to be reasonable, particularly to back benchers. If a point of order is not allowed to be taken until the end of Questions rather than at the end of the Question raised by the hon. Member for Moray and Nairn (Mrs. Ewing), it would seem that the point of order will be lost before she has any chance of raising it.

Mr. Speaker

My only concern is to save the time of the House and get as many Questions put to the Prime Minister as possible.

Later

Mrs. Ewing

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Whatever title the Prime Minister may give my party outside the House, should he not give my party its correct name and title inside the House, bearing in mind that it has over 30 per cent. of the vote in Scotland, only 5 per cent. behind that of the Labour Party and over 5 per cent. ahead of that of the Conservative Party?

The second point of order—

Mr. Speaker

Order. We must deal with points of order one at a time. The matter to which the hon. Lady has just referred is not for the Chair. Now, will the hon. Lady put the second point of order?

Mrs. Ewing

Is it not the honourable tradition in this House, Mr. Speaker, that if a party is deliberately attacked and misrepresented there should be a full and fair opportunity of reply?

Mr. Speaker

That is a matter for the Chair. I do my best to ensure that the minority parties have adequate opportunities. But I am not helped when supplementary questions go on almost interminably.

The Prime Minister

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I was not aware that I made any attack on the hon. Lady's party. If I got its name wrong I hasten to put the matter right. It is a name, or a nickname, very frequently used for the party. If its members are sensi- tive about the use of the phrase, I shall be careful to avoid using it in future so far as it lies within me. However, I am not aware that I attacked the hon. Lady's party at any point. I quoted a statement attributed to Mr. William Wolfe, who was a candidate for her party at the election and who holds high office in her party. I do not think that that should be regarded as an attack on the party.