§ 20. Mr. Wyn Robertsasked the Prime Minister if the speech of the Lord President of the Council at Kirkby on constitutional reform on 25th April represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.
§ 21. Mr. Ridleyasked the Prime Minister whether the public speech of the Lord President of the Council at Kirkby-in-Ashfield on 25th April 1977 on constitutional reform represents the Government's policy.
§ 28. Mr. Eldon Griffithsasked the Prime Minister if the Lord President of the Council's statement that the result of the Ashfield by-election will help Great Britain on the way to a Socialist republic represents the policy of the Government.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Members to the replies given by my right hon. Friend the Lord President of the Council to the hon. Members for Wirral (Mr. Hunt) and Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Costain) on 28th April.
§ Mr. RobertsIs the Prime Minister aware that in the course of that reply the Lord President did not deny the remarks about progressing towards a Socialist republic? Since I cannot believe that the Prime Minister is heading in the same direction, will he take this opportunity to say so unequivocally? Then, perhaps, the rest of the Government, including the Lord President, will fall in line and the principle of collective responsibility, on which the Prime Minister is so keen when it applies to the Opposition, can be reasserted.
§ The Prime MinisterMy right hon. Friend has made it clear that his remarks were wrenched from their context [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I am sure that is true. As for my own position and that of the Government, I refer the hon. Gentleman to the speech I made on 3rd May, when I moved the motion that a humble Address be presented to Her Majesty. He will find epitomised in that speech my sentiments on the Throne, the constitution and the Crown.
§ Mr. RidleyIs the Prime Minister saying that the quoted report in the Nottingham Evening Post is wrong? If not, will he say why he has told my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition that she must be responsible for everything said by Conservative candidates, whereas he is not prepared to repudiate anything said by his Cabinet colleagues?
§ The Prime MinisterSo far as I know, what was said by the Conservative candidate who is now the Member was not wrenched out of context. It was a printed document—
§ Mr. RidleyI have it here.
§ The Prime Minister—whereas I understand that the other matter was a spontaneous reply to a good deal of heckling at the end of a by-election meeting. That was on an entirely different basis. I ask Conservative Members to search their minds and say whether, following heckling at a meeting, they have not thrown back a remark addressed to them. I am sure that each one of them has done so on some occasions.
§ Mr. GriffithsDoes the Prime Minister recognise that we can all make a mistake in what we say, but will he answer this simple question: did the Lord President use the term "a Socialist republic" or did he not? Did he mean it? If he did, will the Prime Minister repudiate him?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman himself has just used the term "Socialist republic". I do not have to repudiate it. It depends on the context in which such a phrase is used and the person to whom it is addressed. There is no written text, and we have to rely on my right hon. Friend's memory. [HONMEMBERS: "Oh."] Opposition Members cannot rely on anything else, because I understand that this piece was written up by a reporter who was 200 miles away at the time it was said. I do not mind the Opposition having a bit of fun about this, but I do not think anybody takes it very seriously.
§ Mr. KinnockIs my right hon. Friend aware that in his views on a Socialist republic the Lord President is advocating views on a change in the constitution which are much more commendable than certain other changes in the constitution recently offered by the Government? In 1548 the deliberations about the constitution which are being undertaken by the Government, will the Prime Minister give consideration to constitutional changes that would enable the House to examine the holders of particularly important and sensitive appointments before they take up those appointments, as is done in other parliamentary systems, so that we may avoid the enormous and stupendous political insensitivity in the appointment of a person who, whatever his individual talents, is inappropriate for the job?
§ The Prime Minister:There has always been a streak of republicanism in this country, and if my hon. Friend the Member for Bedwellty (Mr. Kinnock) wishes to say that he is a republican he is entitled to do so. But that is not the attitude of Her Majesty's Government, and my hon. Friend is not yet a member of that Government. [Interruption.] One does not have to belong to Moscow to be a republican. Republicanism has always been a theme which, frankly, I know the overwhelming majority of the country feels is not appropriate to our constitutional arrangements. That is a matter for my hon. Friend to work out.
As for the second part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, I have nothing to add to what I have said.
§ Mrs. ThatcherAs the Prime Minister has made some inquiries into this matter, and for the sake of greater accuracy, will he tell the House the context in which the Lord President used the phrase?
§ The Prime MinisterI cannot pretend that my researches into this matter have been as detailed as they are into some possible questions. [HONMEMBERS: "Why not?"] Because the matter is not serious enough; that is why. I did, however, see the Daily Express, of which I always take great note, and the Daily Mail. From then on I drew my own conclusions and had a word with my right hon. Friend.
§ Mrs. ThatcherWhat was reported in in the Daily Mail was serious and purported to be verbatim. If that is an accurate report of the context, there is only one reply that the Prime Minister can give namely, that what the Lord President is reported to have said in no way represents Government policy.
§ The Prime MinisterObviously I have not pursued my research far enough, because my right hon. Friend tells me that the Daily Mail reporter who wrote the story was not present. I hope that the right hon. Lady is not relying on that evidence. I think that our attitude is pretty clear on this matter, and I do not think I have anything to add.
§ Mr. RidleyIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to ask leave to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.
§ Mr. EnglishOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Since the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley) accused—
§ Mr. SpeakerMay we take points of order after Questions?
§ Later—
§ Mr. EnglishOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. On Question No. 21 to the Prime Minister, the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley) referred to my local newspaper, the Nottingham Evening Post. Is the Prime Minister aware that it is the only newspaper—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman is very experienced in the ways of the House. He knows whether he has a point of order to put to me or whether he is trying to score points. Has he a point of order?
§ Mr. EnglishI hope that I have, Mr. Speaker. It is the generally accepted custom of the House that if matters concerning an hon. Member's constituency are referred to, that hon. Member is given the opportunity to comment on them—[Interruption.] In one sentence, Mr. Speaker, may I put, through you, to the Prime Minister—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. In one word, "No".
§ Mr. EnglishOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Nottingham Evening Post is, if not the only newspaper, certainly the first in this century that has ever caused a strike of every union of its employees because it sacked over 100 of all their members.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Everyone is proud of his own local paper.