asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what reply he has made to the request of Glasgow Corporation that revaluation of heritable subjects should be delayed for one year, or alternatively that the date for disposing of appeals should be extended.

I explained to the Corporation that postponement of the effective date of revaluation would require legislation and would present insuperable problems. I informed them at the same time that I was watching the position and that if it appeared, when more evidence was available, that there was a case for postponing the last date for disposal of appeals, I would do so.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Minister of State, speaking on his behalf and dealing with the impact of derating and revaluation on shipbuilding, promised legislation to deal with that problem? Had the Minister of State any authority to do that, or was he merely deceiving the shipbuilders and the people of Scotland?

The hon. Member has raised a whole lot of matters which do not arise out of his original Question.

My Question deals with revaluation, and that is the topic to which the Minister of State addressed himself in Scotland last week on behalf of the Secretary of State, who now repudiates it.

The hon. Member must address himself to his own Question and to my Answer to it.

On a point of order. In what way, Mr. Speaker does my supplementary question not derive from the Question which appears on the Order Paper? Is it out of order?

I did not so rule.

May I therefore, Mr. Speaker, proceed to press the Secretary of State with my supplementary question—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—and ask him for an answer to it?

No, I am afraid not. I have no power to compel Ministers to answer.

Then I am right. The Secretary of State repudiates the Minister of State.