CONFIDENTIAL
}
The view has normally been taken that it is not a proper part of the Committee's role to enter into the process of formulating policy which is a matter for the Government of the day, nor to put forward alternative policies to those embodied in the public expenditure figures. Thus officials normally wish to avoid being drawn into discussion covering this sort of ground.
24.
As you will see some of the questions which the Sub-Committee might choose to pursue do enter into the field of alternative policies (particularly in relation to Hong Kong). If the Committee wish to pursue such lines of enquiry, I would propose that our officials give a simple answer but if pressed further by the Committee to reply that such matters are for Ministers to consider in that they involve a departure from present policy. Similarly
I propose that officials should reply if necessary to close questioning about British policy on the substance of eg the Cyprus dispute, by saying that this goes beyond matters which Ministers have authorised them to discuss.
5. It would obviously be preferable not to shelter behind this type of defence earlier or any more than can be helped, but I should be grateful to know if you agree that' officials should have authority to take the line suggested in paragraph 4 if the Committee begins to press awkward policy questions on them beyond a certain point. I have in mind not merely the present session arising from the Committee's tour, but also the prospect of other areas of policy being investigated by the Committee later on if we do not take a firm stand this time.
nlm.
Donald Tebbit
8 December 1975
COPIED TO:
The Private Secretary; PS/Mr Ennals; PS/PUS; PS/Lord Goronwy-Roberts; PS/Mr Hattersley
2 CONFIDENTIAL