Oral Answers to Questions — Technical Co-Operation – in the House of Commons am 12:00 am ar 7 Mai 1964.
Mr Stephen Swingler
, Newcastle-under-Lyme
12:00,
7 Mai 1964
asked the Secretary for Technical Co-operation when he expects to appoint agricultural liaison officers to the High Commission offices in the developing countries of the Commonwealth.
Mr Robert Carr
, Mitcham
I am not convinced that such specialised permanent representation is needed at present, particularly in view of the regular contacts maintained by my professional advisers with these countries; but I will review the position with my right hon. Friend in the light of experience.
Mr Stephen Swingler
, Newcastle-under-Lyme
Has the right hon. Gentleman considered the report which led to this recommendation? Is not he aware that there is a need for a better assessment on the spot of the requirements of the developing countries, not only in terms of equipment and capital but in agriculture, education, and matters of that kind? If only a comparatively small number of personnel is involved, would it not be possible to take some tentative steps to try to get the better liaison which is recommended?
Mr Robert Carr
, Mitcham
I agree with the purpose behind the hon. Member's remarks, but I do not think that the sort of attachment which he suggests in his Question is the best way of meeting the point, at any rate at present. We are trying to build up, and are increasing the establishment of one or two home-based institutions, in order to provide more advisers in the many different specialities connected with agriculture in order to provide a better service overseas.
Mr Francis Noel-Baker
, Swindon
Would not one effective way to deal with this problem be to set up in other parts of the world bodies modelled on the Development Division in the Middle East, operated by the right hon. Gentleman's Department?
Mr Robert Carr
, Mitcham
That Division is certainly doing very fine work. I made a particular point of calling to see how it was working on my way back from Asia before Christmas, and the point that the hon. Gentleman has raised is very much in my mind.
The House of Commons votes by dividing. Those voting Aye (yes) to any proposition walk through the division lobby to the right of the Speaker and those voting no through the lobby to the left. In each of the lobbies there are desks occupied by Clerks who tick Members' names off division lists as they pass through. Then at the exit doors the Members are counted by two Members acting as tellers. The Speaker calls for a vote by announcing "Clear the Lobbies". In the House of Lords "Clear the Bar" is called. Division Bells ring throughout the building and the police direct all Strangers to leave the vicinity of the Members’ Lobby. They also walk through the public rooms of the House shouting "division". MPs have eight minutes to get to the Division Lobby before the doors are closed. Members make their way to the Chamber, where Whips are on hand to remind the uncertain which way, if any, their party is voting. Meanwhile the Clerks who will take the names of those voting have taken their place at the high tables with the alphabetical lists of MPs' names on which ticks are made to record the vote. When the tellers are ready the counting process begins - the recording of names by the Clerk and the counting of heads by the tellers. When both lobbies have been counted and the figures entered on a card this is given to the Speaker who reads the figures and announces "So the Ayes [or Noes] have it". In the House of Lords the process is the same except that the Lobbies are called the Contents Lobby and the Not Contents Lobby. Unlike many other legislatures, the House of Commons and the House of Lords have not adopted a mechanical or electronic means of voting. This was considered in 1998 but rejected. Divisions rarely take less than ten minutes and those where most Members are voting usually take about fifteen. Further information can be obtained from factsheet P9 at the UK Parliament site.
