§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I shall take first the point of order of the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher).
§ Mr. Michael Meacher (Oldham, West)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I rise to ask you to use your good offices to request the Secretary of State for Social Services to make a statement. Following the Government's humiliating defeats on the Social Security Bill yesterday in another place, his proposals for the so-called reform of social security have now degenerated into a ragbag medley of disconnected cuts without any logic or structure. Since the package is now in total disarray, and since in every single policy area his original proposals have now been mauled out of all recognition, the only decent thing for him to do would be to withdraw the whole package. But even if he does not do so, since there is no electoral mandate for this package, since the proposals were almost universally condemned in the consultation exercise and since they have now been decisively thrown out in another place, it would he a constitutional affront to use the whipped majority in this House to reverse these votes. We want an unequivocal assurance to that effect.
The Bill represents the most unpopular set of proposals in this area for 50 years. On every test of public approval, they have failed. The Secretary of State must now recognise that fact and withdraw his package.
§ Mr. SpeakerI know about the changes that have been made in the other place, but there will be an opportunity here to consider Lords amendments. Whether or not a statement is made is not a matter for me, but no doubt we shall deal with the matter when the Bill comes back here.
§ Later—
§ Mr. Bill Michie (Sheffield, Heeley)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I refer to your answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham, West on the Social Security Bill.
190 May I, through you, ask the Leader of the House, who is present, when a statement is likely to be made rather than that we should allow the House of Lords to do further damage to the Bill, which has already lost credibility?
§ Mr. SpeakerI did not say that there will be a statement. That is not a matter for me. I said that the Bill will undoubtedly come back here for consideration of Lords amendments.
§ Mr. Ernie Ross (Dundee, West)Further to the point of order raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher), Mr. Speaker. It is very important that the Secretary of State for Social Services should say whether he intends to proceed in another place with the Bill. It would be a waste of the time of the House if the Bill wee to be brought back here, where it s likely to suffer further defeats.
§ Mr. Terry Lewis (Worsley)rose——
§ Mr. SpeakerIs it the same point of order?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. We have an important debate today. I shall take one more point of order, if it is on the same point.
§ Mr. LewisFurther to the same point of order, Mr. Speaker. Not only were two amendments to the Social Security Bill severely defeated in the other place last evening, but a few others very narrowly scraped through. A coach and horses has been driven through the whole measure and it is now in complete disarray. Surely it is necessary that a statement should be made either today of tomorrow, but preferably today, to satisfy Back Benchers who have worked very hard to explode the very matters that the other place has exploded.
§ Mr. SpeakerI am sure that those comments will have been heard, but they are not matters for me.