TNAG-0480-FCO40-545-Strength-of-garrison-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 172

1

391

Business of the House 31 OCTOBER 1974 [MR. CRYER.]

moment places the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster behind Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, including Euro- pean Economic Community Questions? We all know that the EEC Questions effectively fill out Question Time. Does it not make a farce of Question Time if a Minister with important responsibilities and some strange ideas about investment banks is, in effect, ruled out of Question Time? Can my right hon. Friend give

us an assurance that he will use his best endeavours to make sure that the Chan- cellor of the Duchy is answerable to back benchers of this House at Question Time?

Mr. Short: I will certainly look at the point my hon. Friend raises. We have carried the old roster forward with one exception. We have not included the Second Church Commissioner because we have not yet got one.

. Mr. Burden: Can the right hon. Gentle. man give us some idea of when the defence White Paper can be expected since its absence is causing concern among some of our allies who are curious about its contents? Is he aware that it is also causing concern among members of the forces and also those who are engaged in the armaments industry?

Mr. Short: I understand the hon. Gentleman's anxiety. The General Elec- tion has delayed this matter to some extent, and the White Paper will not now be published until early next year. But the Government will make a statement in the House before the end of November.

Mr. Lee: Further to the point made by the right hon. Member for Down, South (Mr. Powell), may I ask whether we can have an assurance that all the orders that have not yet been debated will be given time? Can my right hon. Friend tell us how many orders are in the pipeline?

Mr. Short: There are a number, a very large number, to be debated, and we intend to make a start on them with short debates. I am afraid that they have to be short debates. If we gave them a lot of time they would swamp the busi- ness of the House. These are matters of very great importance, and the House must devise some kind of machinery for dealing with the orders, at any rate the

1 M 8

392

Business of the House ones of less importance, and must be prepared to debate the major ones,

Mr. Costain: In view of the unusual nature of the debate on the Channel Tunnel motion, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he agrees with his hion. Friend the Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Huckfield) that the Second Reading procedure should be followed? Can we

have some indication that those who have constituency questions can deal with

them?

Mr. Short: We had better wait for the debate and see how it goes. The effect of the motion would be to reinstate the Bill at the point at which we left it before the General Election.

Mr. Peyton rose ————

Hon. Members: Hear hear.

Mr. Peyton: The right hon. Member will not be altogether surprised if I say that his answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham (Mr. Burden) was not received with any enthusiasm. Is he aware that an carly statement dealing with defence is essential? Further, may I ask whether he will make an early and clear statement to the House about the availability of the Acts of Parliament which we churned through in the last Parliament? While I would not like anything I say to be taken as an indica- tion that those measures contain any merit, it is desirable that the public should know what it is up against.

Mr. Short: I must first of all con- gratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his devolution from the back benches to the Front Bench. I understand his anxiety and that of his hon. Friends to read some of the amendments which they wrote into our legislation in the last Parliament. I will certainly look into that point and discuss it with the right hon. Gentlemait and, if necessary, make a statement to the House. As to defence, I gave a specific promise that there will be a statement in the House, I think in the third week of November, dealing with this subject.

Mr. Wellbeloved : In view of the pressure for proper time to debate Euro- pean legislation and the possibility that if such time is given it might clash with available parliamentary time fer the introduction of Socialist legislation, may