20 NOVEMBER 1964, Page 11

Fit to Rule

The Observer, in commenting on a letter of mine in The Times, misstates my view of the con- stitutional position following a government de- feat in the House of Commons. I was not arguing that a government should resign follow-

ing an 'isolated defeat' that would be absurd, whether its majority was four or forty. I was arguing that on a formal motion of no con- fidence (in this case an amendment to the Queen's Speech) neither fog nor flu nor faint hearts can provide sufficient excuse for failing to defeat the challenge. It is not likely that there will be more than half a dozen or so of these in a session, but the Government must surely stand or fall by its performance. Already it has been suggested by a Labour MP that Members should be allowed to vote by proxy, and the Prime Minister his replied that this idea should be put to the Select Committee on Procedure. On the contrary, it should have been strangled at birth. If we are to vote by proxy there would be no need for divi- sions at all. The Chief Whips could simply hand in statements certifying that all their sheep were (or were not) alive, and the Speaker could then announce this to the House.