HC Deb 28 October 1943 vol 393 cc381-6
Mr. Arthur Greenwood

Might I ask the Prime Minister whether he would state the Business for the next series of Sittings?

The Prime Minister (Mr. Churchill)

It will be necessary for the House to sit an additional day in the next series of Sittings. The Business will be as follows:

First Sitting Day—Concluding stages of the Wage-earners' Income Tax Bill and Second Reading of the Price Control (Regulation of Disposal of Stocks) Bill [Lords].

Second Sitting Day—Committee and remaining stages of the Parliament (Elections and Meeting) Bill and of the Prolongation of Parliament Bill.

Third Sitting Day—Committee stage of a Supplementary Vote of Credit for War Expenditure. Afterwards the Adjournment will be moved, and a Debate will take place on the food situation in India.

Fourth Sitting Day—Committee stage of the Water Undertakings Bill [Lords], and further consideration of any outstanding Business.

Mr. Greenwood

Will the Prime Minister consider the possibility of having a discussion at a fairly early date on the financial discussions that have taken place in Washington? The House was informed a little time ago that before any commitments were made, or, at any rate, before any conclusions were reached, the matter could be debated in the House. In view of statements that have appeared in the public Press, I should like the Prime Minister to give the assurance again that such an opportunity will be provided as early as is practicable.

The Prime Minister

I am not sure what will be the convenient time, but obviously the House must be informed on the whole field of these complicated matters. We are not entirely masters of our own actions in the matter. Some of the publication must depend on the permission of other Governments, and we must feel our way. But the opportunities that the House has of raising all financial matters in the regular cycle of Parliamentary Business are so ample and so numerous that I cannot feel that there will not be an opportunity for raising any of these questions.

Mr. Pethick-Lawrence

The late Chancellor of the Exchequer gave a specific pledge that before any final commitments were entered into by the Government this House would have an opportunity of discussing the matter and we just want to be reassured that that pledge has in no way gone by the board in view of the lamentable death of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer and the accession to that important position of the present Chancellor.

The Prime Minister

My right hon. Friend tells me that he has specifically renewed that pledge, and so it stands.

Mr. Shinwell

Might I ask a question which arises out of the Workmen's Compensation Bill Committee stage yesterday? No doubt the Prime Minister has been informed of the proceedings. He may have detected that some confusion existed in the minds of hon. Members regarding an alleged agreement reached by outside bodies, of which hon. Members were informed by the Home Secretary. This affects the particular Amendment discussed yesterday, and I would ask the Prime Minister whether, before the Report stage, he will produce for the information of hon. Members the details of that agreement between the Trades Union Congress, the Employers' Confederation and the Home Secretary? We were advised yesterday that there had been such an agreement or understanding, and that to some extent Members were bound by it. It is not admitted, of course, that we were bound by such an agreement, but it did determine the course of the proceedings; and, in those circumstances, will the right hon. Gentleman consider putting the details of such an agreement before the House?

The Prime Minister

I have always understood that it was one of the first duties of the Government and of Ministers in charge of particular Measures to do all they could to obtain outside agreements. Again and again we have been asked, and I have heard Ministers asked, "Why do you not try to settle this with the parties concerned?" But all discussions with these outside bodies are naturally private and informal. I understand there is no written document drawn up or anything like it. These conversations must go on, and they could never go on if there was always to be a report laid before the House. The House is master whenever a thing is brought before it. It can do whatever it thinks right and wise, but certainly I would always countenance, if not counsel, that it was an advantage for Ministers who hold office to authorise facilities for making good arrangements outside with other bodies.

Mr. Shinwell

Are we to understand that while it is appropriate that Ministers should enter into discussions with outside bodies, to which no exception can be taken—

Mr. Speaker

I cannot see that this has anything to do with the Business announced for the next series of Sittings. It is more suitable to a discussion which might take place on the Floor of the House on the Bill itself.

Mr. Shinwell

On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. I am anxious to safeguard the position of hon. Members when we come to the Report stage and to ensure that, if we are to consider the matter in all its bearings without any hindrance, we should have before us any agreement, if such an agreement exists, or be assured that no agreement exists.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member has heard the answer of the Prime Minister.

Mr. Stokes

To return to the first matter raised by the right hon. Member for Wakefield (Mr. Greenwood), may I ask the Prime Minister, in order to set at rest fears which are exercising the minds of a great many Members, whether the reports in the Press of the statement made by Mr. Morgenthau in Cairo, that agreement has already been reached on post-war currency between His Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States, are entirely without foundation?

The Prime Minister

I have not myself seen the actual words attributed to Mr. Morgenthau and certainly I would not be prepared to state that any remarks that he made are entirely without foundation, for he is an extremely serious and responsible high official of the United States Government. But the facts are as I have said. The House will be given an opportunity of discussing the matter before any final decision or agreement is made. An agreement may either mean a bond or it may mean a meeting of minds on the subject.

Mr. Maxton

As the Committee stage of the Workmen's Compensation Bill was not completed last night because of some regrettable interchanges, may I, on the point raised by the hon. Member for Seaham (Mr. Shinwell), ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether it is your view, as it was the view of the Home Secretary, that it is a discreditable thing and is not playing the game for Members of this House to try to improve on a deal that the Home Secretary had made with an outside body? May I put this further point—

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member is going far beyond the Business announced for the next series of Sittings.

Mr. Maxton

That, Sir, was only preliminary to asking the Prime Minister whether we can afford a week's delay, because obviously in the Business announced, the Committee stage of the Workmen's Compensation Bill has not been put down for the next series of Sittings. Are we to have it before the end of the Session?

The Prime Minister

We were led to believe that the Measure was an agreed Measure, and it was on that footing that it was introduced. However, individual Members who did not feel themselves bound to agree—I am not making any reproaches—created a certain liveliness on the matter. This is not at all unhealthy, but I must say that the Government's position was that the Bill was to be an agreed Bill, or largely an agreed Bill. We would like very much to carry it, because of the benefits it conveys, but if its future course were to be seriously prolonged or protracted by discussion, it might not be possible for us to persevere.

Mr. Ralph Etherton

With regard to the Committee stage of the Water Undertakings Bill, which the Prime Minister announced for the fourth Sitting Day, and in view of the volume and technical nature of the Amendments which have been put down, extending over seven or eight pages of the Order Paper, may I ask the Prime Minister whether the Government will consider whether that Bill should not be committed to a Standing Committee of the House?

The Prime Minister

There are great difficulties in having Standing Committees during the war. The hours of sitting and the general wartime conditions have been such that we have had no Standing Committees during the war, and it would take, I think, very considerable reasons to justify us in making that departure from our wartime practice at the present moment.

Mr. Stokes

Is the Prime Minister now able to give any indication as to when an opportunity will be given for a discussion in this House of the United Nations Reconstruction Bank, final particulars of which reached the Treasury a week or so ago and about which I asked him last week?

The Prime Minister

I am not able to give any information on that at the present, moment.

Sir H. Williams

Further to the point on the proceedings for the fourth Sitting Day, is the Prime Minister aware that for weeks past there has been at least one Motion on the Order Paper asking that this Bill should be referred to a Select Committee? The difficulty that exists with regard to Standing Committees do not exist with respect to a Select Committee, and is a Select Committee not the most appropriate tribunal before which to send such a very technical Bill?

Earl Winterton

Is the Prime Minister aware that there is very considerable feeling on this matter in circles most favourable to the Government, and will he, not so much on this particular question as on the general question, assure us that it will receive his consideration? After all, it is a big departure from Parliamentary practice for four years to depart from what is an old-standing custom of the House.

The Prime Minister

I will gladly consider it.

Mr. Gallacher

May I ask the Prime Minister whether he will seriously consider setting up once again the Scottish Grand Committee, in view of the fact that, if we had had it set up and it had been working yesterday, he would have got the Workmen's Compensation Bill through the Committee stage?

Mr. Speaker

That question is again far removed from the business of the next series of Sitting Days.