§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why it took him until 26 August to reply to the hon. Member for Newham, North-West's letter of 30 July regarding Miss R. B. of Stratford E15 request for entry into Great Britain of her fiancé; and what was contained in this letter (Ref. No. B387121) other than that he should apply in Bangladesh which could not have been conveyed to the hon. Member earlier.
26W
§ Mr. Raison:The hon. Member's letter reached me on 2 August. In order to give as helpful a reply as possible, the entry clearance officer in Dacca was asked whether any application had been received from Miss R. B.'s fianc". A final reply was despatched to the hon. Member on 26 August, which does not seem to me unreasonable
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why it took until 1 September for his Assistant Private Secretary to write to the hon. Member for Newham, North-West in reply to his letter of 12 July regarding a deportation order (Ref. 058868/8(S)); in view of the fact that this letter only stated inquiries were being made, why an earlier reply along these lines was not sent; why reference was made to a reply having been sent earlier to the Member's letter of 24 June, when this latter reply was dated 23 March; and whether he will expedite replies to correspondents generally and to hon. Members in particular.
§ Mr. Raison:The hon. Member's letter of 12 July was received simultaneously with representations from other hon. Members. The delay in sending an interim reply, which I regret, was due to the pressure of work and the need to decide what further action to take in this particular case. The hon. Member himself asked for a copy of my final reply of 23 March to his letter of 24 June 1981. We are satisfied that, as far as the proper consideration of cases will allow, every effort is made to reply promptly to all correspondence and to hon. Members in particular.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why it took him until 26 August to reply to the hon. Member for Newham, North-West's letter of 9 August regarding alleged preferential treatment upon the part of the police in their appointments in Derbyshire, as made by his constituent Mr. D. J. Hands; what was contained in this letter which could not have been sent earlier; and whether he wil.1 expedite his replies to correspondence in the future.
§ Mr. Whitelaw:Correspondence is dealt with as quickly as possible. There was no unnecessary delay in this case.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why it took his Department until 20 August to send to the hon. Member for Newham, North-West his letter dated 19 August informing the hon. Member that his letter of 9 August was being referred to the chief constable of Norfolk for attention; what was contained in this letter which could not have been notified earlier; and whether he will expedite replies in general to ensure that it does not take three weeks to advise correspondents, including hon. Members, that the matter raised is receiving attention or being passed to someone else for attention.
§ Mr. Whitelaw:The hon. Member's letter was received on 10 August and within two days a letter of acknowledgement was sent. The purpose of the letter of 19 August (a further seven days later) was to explain that a police report would be needed before a full reply could be sent, and I believe that most hon. Members find such interim replies helpful.