Former MP for Woodbridge
I cannot allow my hon. Friend the Member for Eye (Mr. Granville) to get away with his claim that any credit attaches to the Liberal party for the sugar-beet subsidy. I was not a Member of the last Parliament, but I have looked up the records, and I find that the vast majority of the Liberal party voted against it while the others abstained. I have a recollection that not so many days ago the...
That is exactly the question which was put to the Minister on 14th May by the hon. Member for Eye and not by me. He asked whether the Minister would take steps to alter the constitution. I say that that question can only have one of several implications: first, that the decision was given against the weight of evidence; and I know that that committee sat on many occasions, most lengthy...
The Minister for Mines, referring to a similar—
I am referring to the general principle of holding—
I do not wish to be misunderstood. I am not referring to the decision of the Suffolk wages committee.
I did not intend to refer to it, and what I intended to say was that it is necessary for the Government to uphold these decisions of impartial committees appointed by themselves and not to refer to their decisions as abominable and infamous.
It is within the recollection of the House that the Minister of Mines did refer to a decision given by an impartial man as infamous and abominable.
I did not say so at all, if I may correct the Minister. I ask the right hon. Gentleman to say to-day that he still has confidence in the Suffolk agricultural wages committee and not to refer to decisions which they have given in the same way as one of his colleagues has referred to other decisions given by other impartial tribunals.
