Mr Tom Driberg: I doubt whether either the hon. Member or I could do that—
Mr Tom Driberg: My hon. Friend says that the hon. Gentleman could do so on commercial radio. I think that he is—
Mr Tom Driberg: asked the Secretary of State for Social Services in view of the official publication by the United States Food and Drug Administration of a list of products which are useless or dangerous, a copy of which is in his possession, and since many of these products are sold in Great Britain, if he will now issue a similar list as a warning to the public; and if he will introduce legislation...
Mr Tom Driberg: But is the hon. Gentleman aware that that list has been available for some months, I think in his Department as well as elsewhere, and that it contains not only drugs which are harmful but drugs which are useless and cosmetics which are useless—things, like Colgate's toothpaste, which are widely sold in this country? Does he remember that the thalidomide tragedy did not occur in the United...
Mr Tom Driberg: The hon. and gallant Gentleman will recall that at the end of that programme there was a fairly lengthy interview with the Minister himself, in glowing colours, when the Minister explained exactly what the hon. and gallant Gentleman is asking for.
Mr Tom Driberg: On a point of order. I am not sure whether this is a point of order, Mr. Speaker, but I should like to ask for your protection. I do so because the hon. and gallant Member for Winchester (Rear-Admiral Morgan-Giles) made a remark about me which was both extremely offensive and totally untrue. I want to ask whether he can be persuaded not to leave the Chamber until he has withdrawn it.
Mr Tom Driberg: I hope the House will forgive me if I start by addressing a personal word, through you, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. and gallant Member for Winchester (Rear-Admiral Morgan-Giles) who referred to me in a way which was extremely offensive and totally untrue. To give one example, entirely for the hon. and gallant Member's information—I dislike appearing to shoot a line—but in the Korean war I...
Mr Tom Driberg: If I am to take that as a withdrawal, of course I accept it, with a few reservations. I do not remember using the words referred to by the hon. and gallant Gentleman, but I fear that he thinks that anybody who criticises any aspect of the administration of the Armed Forces, in defence of the rights of soldiers, sailors and airmen, is anti the Armed Forces. Nothing could be further from the...
Mr Tom Driberg: My opinion on this programme is different from that of the hon. and gallant Gentleman. As I said when I intervened in his speech, I thought that the Minister had a very fair show at the end. The interview, with the Minister looking very impressive in his office, was a reasonably long one and he was able to make his point about rehabilitation and about the reforms initiated, as he said, by my...
Mr Tom Driberg: They are always called "groundless".
Mr Tom Driberg: Some weeks before.
Mr Tom Driberg: Next door.
Mr Tom Driberg: No.
Mr Tom Driberg: One reply that the hon. Gentleman gave in the previous debate, which was a little disappointing, was about the tasks, the picking oakum, and he said: But the tasks will remain, all the same; we do need the mats in the Royal Nary."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 13th January, 1971; Vol. 809, c. 150.] That was not very satisfactory.
Mr Tom Driberg: Not in fatuous tasks.
Mr Tom Driberg: We have just listened to one of the most deceitful and evasive speeches—[Interruption].
Mr Tom Driberg: We have just been forced to listen to one of the most deceitful and evasive speeches ever made in this Parliament. [Interruption.] The next Labour Government will have to repeal this shameful act pretty damn' quick—[Interruption.]—and this Government's display of the naked reality of the class war will shock the country.
Mr Tom Driberg: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will review the workings of the Official Secrets Acts, with particular reference to the recent tendency of governments to extend the scope of the Acts beyond their original purpose of combating espionage and other serious threats to national security.
Mr Tom Driberg: While warmly welcoming that reply, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman if the committee will include, besides representatives of the security services and lawyers, who are no doubt necessary, any ordinary lay people such as those who have been or some day might be victims of the wider application of this Act?
Mr Tom Driberg: Is the right hon. Gentleman quite certain that a third London airport is necessary at all? Has he studied the well-informed article in a recent issue of the Economist, by its aviation correspondent, suggesting that it may not be necessary at this time?