Research and Development (Hansard, 12 March 1986)

§ 19. Mr. Soames
asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he has any plans to increase the research and development budget of his Department.

§ Mr. Channon
My Department's research and development budget is forecast to increase from £415 million in 1986–87 to £438 million in 1988–89.

§ Mr. Soames
I thank my right hon. Friend for that good news. Does he agree that if we are to compete seriously with the Japanese and the Germans we willll have to spend a great deal more money on research and development? May I suggest that for a start he plunders the Ministry of Defence, which has sums of money beyond the dreams of avarice to spend on research and development?

§ Mr. Channon
I note what my hon. Friend has said. A major increase is already planned in the proportion of my Department's budget for research and development, which will go from 27 per cent. in 1984–85 to 46 per cent. in 1988–89. With increasing company profitability. I hope that the private sector will match that increase.

§ Mr. Dalyell
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
Does it arise out of questions?

§ Mr. Dalyell
Yes, Mr. Speaker. May I draw your attention to the increasing habit among Ministers of deflecting questions by referring to statements in Hansard and to previous answers which in no way cover the question which was asked? May I draw your attention to columns 793 and 799 in yesterday's Hansard? Answers by the Defence Secretary on the visit of a senior American official—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I do not think that arises out of questions today. The hon. Gentleman correctly drew attention to his good fortune in having drawn the subject for debate under the Consolidated Fund. I think that we should wait until then to hear the answer.

§ Mr. Dalyell
It is the habit of Ministers, by sleight of ministerial hand, to avoid answering legitimate questions. I asked for a very simple answer to a question—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. What is the point of order for me in that? I cannot be responsible for what Ministers say or how they answer questions.

§ Mr. Dalyell
The point of order has nothing to do with the substance of the particular issue. A legitimate question was asked as to whether the Department knew about the visit—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. That is not a matter for me.

§ Mr. Williams
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. My hon. Friend has a legitimate grievance—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I must say to the shadow Leader of the House that, although his hon. Friend may have a legitimate grievance, it is not a grievance with me. I cannot be responsible for answers which are given from the Front Bench.

§ Mr. Skinner
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. There is a matter in it for you. If Ministers fail to answer questions quickly and precisely by saying yes or no, and reel out long evasive statements which refer to other matters, they take up time which could be used by other people.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. This is taking time out of an important Opposition day.