Mr Tom Driberg: How soon will the Government be able to make a statement regarding their reconsideration of the Beveridge Report as promised in the light of last week's Debate?
Mr Tom Driberg: Was capitalism dealt with objectively?
Mr Tom Driberg: On what basis is that censorship exercised?
Mr Tom Driberg: I will detain the House for only a few minutes. I want to ask one question, and make one point. I want to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can say, either now or at some convenient future date, one or two sentences to illuminate a little further this vexed minor problem of the post-war functions of the Home Guard. When this question was last raised in the House he said that the...
Mr Tom Driberg: Then the heavy father. I hope he will never be tempted to infanticide by the occasional ebullitions of adolescence. But it did seem to me that in one passage of his speech he was a little less than fair to education, welfare, and kindred subjects. He fell into the growing Ministerial habit of what I can only call juggling with unreal priorities. There was a good deal of that last week. The...
Mr Tom Driberg: asked the Secretary of State for War how soon he anticipates that the revised version of the Army Bureau of Current Affairs Beveridge bulletin will be distributed; whether it will contain an objective summary of the original Beveridge proposals as well as a statement of the Government's intentions; and whether copies of it will be placed in the Library so that hon. Members may have the...
Mr Tom Driberg: Is it not possible for the right hon. Gentleman at least to answer the last part of Question 24?
Mr Tom Driberg: asked the Prime Minister how soon the Government will be able to make a further statement of their attitude to the Beveridge Report?
Mr Tom Driberg: Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that there is very deep concern and anxiety in the country and the Forces at the Government's apparent surrender to the Prudential? Will he expedite this reconsideration, in view of the promise given by the Lord President of the Council?
Mr Tom Driberg: Are there not already enough penalties for infringements of food regulations?
Mr Tom Driberg: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any further statement to make on the possibility of a visit to this country of Madame Chiang Kai-shek?
Mr Tom Driberg: If it is correct, as rumoured, that Madame Chiang Kai-shek's health may prevent her from crossing the Atlantic, will the right hon. Gentleman convey to her the disappointment and sympathy which will be felt widely here, and will he consider whether it would be possible to invite one of her two brilliant sisters to visit us instead?
Mr Tom Driberg: asked the Postmaster-General whether he will cease describing as air mail and charging for at the high air-mail rate, the mail such as that to and from India, which is sea-borne for the greater part of its journey?
Mr Tom Driberg: Is it not a fact that there is not a substantial acceleration at present of this so-called air mail? Is it not rather absurd that it often takes longer than the sea mail sent at ordinary rates?
Mr Tom Driberg: Then why not abolish the air mail?
Mr Tom Driberg: In cases of six years' service or more are cases always considered individually or are units ever considered as units?
Mr Tom Driberg: May I explain to the hon. and learned Gentleman, since he seems to be unaware of the fact, that the terms "Hi-de-hi" and "Ho-de-ho" are part of the ordinary jargon of swing music?
Mr Tom Driberg: asked the Secretary of State for India whether he has considered the reprint sent to him of the two recent articles in the "Calcutta Diocesan Record," regarding requests by the civil police that inhabitants of a residential district in Calcutta should move elsewhere, their houses being required for brothels for the military; and whether he will inquire into the circumstances in which such...
Mr Tom Driberg: Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that, if a responsible church publication like this and the Bishop of Calcutta make detailed and grave charges of this kind, it is evident that some official who has made a blunder is being protected and the matter is being hushed up? Will he reinvestigate and make sure that, if people have been turned out of their houses, they shall be restored to them?
Mr Tom Driberg: Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that this organisation was able recently to secure a large London theatre for a meeting, and that the meeting was cancelled only as a result of the publicity given to it in this House, although we had not advertised the body by name?