AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

WES TM NSTER HAUL

1st December 1978
Page 7
Page 7, 1st December 1978 — WES TM NSTER HAUL
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

It was inevitable ... MPs are so jealous of their rights and privileges, so insistent that they should be told first of any important Government decision, that they were bound to create about the way in which Transport Secretary William Rodgers announced the ending of the car tax.

The way he told the Commons was bad enough — by a written answer to a question handily put down the day before. There is, in the eyes of most Backbenchers, no more shady way of telling them of Government intentions.

And what made the whole exercise even more shameful was that the Press had been told and Mr Rodgers gave a conference at which he revealed all, and handed out a I7-page document. Oh, the ignominy of reading all about it, instead of hearing it for themselves from the Rodgers lips!

But such are the oddities of Parliamentary life, it was not the offending Minister who had to face the wrath of MPs. That task fell the way of Michael Foot Leader of the House and as such champion of the rights of Backbenchers.

Days after the event, when the Commons were discussing forthcoming business, up rose an indignant Norman St. John-Stevas, in his new role as Mr Foot's Tory opposite number. the written anwer prevented any questioning, he complained, while the press conference added insult to injury.

The Leader perhaps thought it would be tactless to point out that his leader had, in fact, been drawn into talking about car tax. During a questions about pay talks Mr Callaghan had — to us his own words — broken the veil of secrecy, by mentioning a little about the proposals.

So it was that Mr Foot faced the storm on his own, and steadily got more indignant. He strongly rejected a suggestion from Tory Eldon Griffiths that the House was being bypassed — it was, he said, absolutely false and a gross abuse of the English language.

What caused him really to lose his cool, however, was a suggestion right at the end from Mr St John-Stevas. If Mr Foot's argument about the way in which the news was released was valid, the Budget Statement might just as well be made by way of a written answer.

"A more ridiculous proposition was never advanced, even by the hon Gentleman, " flashed Mr Foot.