HL Deb 21 February 1967 vol 280 cc604-7

2.38 p.m.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether there is any truth in the Press reports of February 16 attributing to the President of the Board of Trade an estimate that British participation in the Common Market would raise our cost of living by 4 per cent., and whether there is any reason to revise the Prime Minister's previous estimate of 2½per cent.]

THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE EARL OF LNGFORD)

My Lords, the meeting which the President of the Board of Trade was addressing was private. It is not the Government's custom to comment on reports of alleged statements at private meetings.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, I am aware that the statement was made at a private meeting. But is the noble Earl aware that Cabinet Ministers now get far more publicity from what they say at private meetings than from what they say at public meetings? Is it not right that Parliament should seek to elucidate the meaning of the information thus disseminated? Is the noble Earl aware that we all want to support the Government on their Common Market policy, and that it makes it very difficult if there are these discrepancies between statements of different Members of the Cabinet with regard to possible rises in prices, and also with regard to the possibility of a financial crisis happening every three years?

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, the noble Earl has made some friendly observations, some cast in interrogative form and some not. I doubt whether he is helping the cause of the Common Market by putting down this particular Question. The noble Earl said that his sole object was to help the Government. I am bound to say that it would not have struck me that that was his purpose. I can only say that if he wants me to be argumentative—which perhaps he does not—may I point out that he is wrong in referring to the Prime Minister as having said that the increase in the cost of living would be 2½ per cent. The Prime Minister actually said that it would be 2½ per cent. to 3½ per cent. But I should prefer not to comment on these private discussions.

LORD HARLECH

My Lords, as there has been some rather unhelpful speculation, on this particular occasion—though I recognise that what goes on at a private meeting should be kept private—would it not be better if there were published precisely what the President of the Board of Trade said on this occasion? Secondly, would it not be as well for all of us if the President of the Board of Trade were now to make a public statement of his strong support for the Government initiative in this respect?

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, I do not think we have quite reached the point where Ministers are compelled to testify in public along these lines. I should not have thought that that was customary in the days of noble Lords opposite. It would be very unusual, and rather undesirable. I am sure that the noble Lord and his colleagues when in office—and indeed when not in office—have always tried to maintain privacy even when they have not been successful in so doing.

LORD SALTOUN

My Lords, may I ask a supplementary question, which I think will help the Government? The Question on the Paper asks, whether there is any reason to revise the Prime Minister's previous estimate of 2½ per cent"— or, as the noble Earl, Lord Longford, said, 2½ per cent. to 3 per cent. May I ask, as a supplementary question to that, whether the Government have any reason to revise the Prime Minister's previous estimate?

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, there is no reason to revise the Prime Minister's estimate, which was very qualified and very cautious, but it seems impossible to arrive at any accuracy in referring to this estimate. I said 2½ per cent. to 3½ per cent., and in the Question the phrase "2½ per cent." has crept in. Now the noble Lord, Lord Saltoun, talks about 3 per cent. What the Prime Minister said was 2½ per cent. to 3½ per cent., and there is no reason, so far as I am aware, to revise that estimate.

LORD BLYTON

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the President of the Board of Trade's speech last week was a first-class speech? Is he further aware that if the Prime Minister wants a great debate on the Common Market issues, then both sides of the question ought to be put before the public?

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, I am sure that there is a lot of thought in some of the philosophy of the noble Lord, though not in all of it. Whether it was a first-class speech or not I am afraid that none of us will ever know—at any rate officially.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, will the noble Earl believe that we really do want to help the Government, and will members of the Government be equally helpful in not spreading these alarmist statements?

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, I must take anything which the noble Earl says as his purpose as being a sincere objective, but apart from that, I should not have thought that he was putting down this Question in a helpful mood, particularly when he distorted the remark of the Prime Minister.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, I certainly did not intend to distort the remark of the Prime Minister. I have the remark here, and he referred to: retail prices of 10 to 14 per cent., which represents about 2½ per cent. to 3½ per cent. on the cost of living. I do not think that the quotation of one of these figures should be described as a distortion.

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, my words certainly were not intended to be offensive to the noble Earl, but I am afraid that it remains an inaccuracy.