Sir Eric Errington: asked the Secretary of State for Defence (1) when he will publish a new pensions warrant for Service personnel following the increased pay scales for serving officers and men; (2) what are his proposed amendments to the terminal grants to officers and men on retirement in view of the increased Service pay scales; and if he will make a statement.
Sir Eric Errington: Is consideration being given in the preparation of the new pensions code to the position of widows, particularly those widowed before 50? Does the Minister realise that it is vastly important from a recruiting point of view that these matters should be fairly dealt with?
Sir Eric Errington: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will publish a White Paper on the Seychelles Conference which has been held in London.
Sir Eric Errington: Is there no possibility that facts that are of great importance to this small island in the Indian Ocean can be quickly communicated to it?
Sir Eric Errington: The New Clause—"Priority seats for chronically sick and disabled persons"—to which I put my name, has not been selected. I should like to know whether the effect of the Clause which we are debating can have impact on the Ministry of Transport with reference to public transport. There is considerable trouble for the perhaps less seriously disabled in using public transport. This matter...
Sir Eric Errington: Sir E. Errington rose—
Sir Eric Errington: With respect, Sir, I was only going to ask a question about the less seriously disabled. The Under-Secretary did not answer that point.
Sir Eric Errington: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he expects to publish his reply to the report of the Estimates Committee on the Inland Revenue.
Sir Eric Errington: May I take it that this lengthy delay in making a reply has resulted in very careful consideration of the report by the Inland Revenue?
Sir Eric Errington: asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will now take steps to amend the law relating to the sending of obscene literature through the post.
Sir Eric Errington: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that our constituents are being flooded with invitations to purchase pornographic literature? This morning I received a letter from a lady who said that her husband had had such a letter addressed to him, although he was dead. She had opened the letter with horror. In another case a letter was sent to a child below the age of 14. Cannot something be done...
Sir Eric Errington: Does my hon. Friend visualise selective or wholesale conscription?
Sir Eric Errington: First, I apologise to the Minister for not being here when he spoke. It was because I was present at an Estimates Sub-Committee, discussing recruiting. There has been a considerable improvement in the buildings for the Services in my constituency. There have still been delays which are to some extent rather worrying. The Minister will remember that the Army Catering Corps building, which is...
Sir Eric Errington: One of the things that is surprising is the lack of interest on the benches opposite in this very important matter. There have been no more than two or three hon. Members on them.
Sir Eric Errington: Sir E Errington rose—
Sir Eric Errington: Will that opportunity be open to ratings?
Sir Eric Errington: Will the Leader of the House say whether time can be given for a debate on the report of the Estimates Committee on the Board of Inland Revenue?
Sir Eric Errington: The Bill introduces a large number of subjects but it is unsatisfactory to have under the general heading of "Administration of Justice" such a large number of varying and important provisions. One wonders whether full justice has been done to the eminent gentlemen who have provided the varied reports on which the provisions of the Bill have been based. There have been a large number of these...
Sir Eric Errington: Is this the first occasion on which this sort of Clause has been inserted in a Bill?
Sir Eric Errington: If there is an Amendment to a part of the Bill with which the Law Commission has dealt, would it not be a nonsense to expect a provision which had nothing to do with the Law Commission to be interpreted by the Commission?
