HC Deb 21 September 1943 vol 392 cc32-5
Mr. Arthur Greenwood

May I ask the Leader of the House whether he has any statement to make with regard to future Business?

The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Eden)

The speech which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister proposes to make to-day on the war situation will inevitably occupy a considerable amount of time, so I was going to suggest to the House that it might be convenient to all concerned if the Sitting were suspended during the course of my right hon. Friend's speech. There are, as Members know, precedents for this, notably the precedent when such consideration was shown to my right hon. Friend during his Budget speech in 1928. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, with the consent of the House, I hope you will be good enough, if the House approves, to suspend the Sitting for one hour, after my right hon. Friend will have spoken for about an hour. If this were agreed, so that hon. Members would not lose time for debate as a result, I would propose later a Motion to extend to-day's Sitting for an hour and a half to make up the time which would be otherwise lost.

So far as the remainder of the present series of Sittings is concerned, it will no doubt meet the wishes of the House if the war Debate is continued for a second day, and we propose to set apart the third and fourth Sittings Days for a Debate on man-power. In view of the time it is proposed to allot for the discussions on the war and man-power, the House will be asked to sit an additional day during this series of Sittings.

It may be convenient if I inform the House that it is proposed to adjourn on the last day of this series of Sittings until the first Sitting Day after 10th October. Then we shall resume the normal Sittings and consider the Business which the Government desire to complete before the end of the present Session.

Mr. Greenwood

I imagine that the suggestions made by the Leader of the House to-day will meet with the general approval of Members of the House on all sides and will give the Prime Minister the advantage of a little sustenance during the middle of his speech. May I put this point to the Leader of the House? It is some time since there has been a Debate on the war situation. Great events have happened in recent weeks. The Prime Minister has had lengthy discussions with the President of the United States, and is it not a matter for very earnest consideration as to whether the House should not have three days to consider the war situation? In that case perhaps the House might rise on the third Sitting Day of this series and would wish, in view of the abnormally wide issues raised by the man-power Debate, to have three days' Debate on that subject. I make this suggestion for the consideration of my right hon. Friend—that one of these days might be specially earmarked for the mining situation. Otherwise, the Debate would become very involved.

Sir John Wardlaw-Milne

Before my right hon. Friend replies, may I ask that, while I do not oppose the suggestions which have been made, he will have consultations with all quarters of the House before he comes to any final decision, in view of the fact that Members have known for a week past the Government's intention that the House should rise at the end of this series of Sittings and may have made other arrangements? It is desirable that they should be consulted in a case of this kind. I do not in any way oppose the suggestion, but I hope my right hon. Friend will not come to an immediate decision regarding the arrangements.

Mr. Maxton

I am not dissenting from the proposal the right hon. Gentleman has made, but I wish to raise this point. I hope that this proposal to adjourn for an hour will be regarded as a very exceptional proceeding. The right hon. Gentleman will remember that a Committee of the House, drawn from all quarters, discussed the whole question of the Sittings of the House and specifically rejected the idea that there should be an Adjournment for the luncheon period.

Mr. Eden

I entirely agree with what the hon. Member says, and it was with some hesitation that I proposed it. On the other hand, I felt that the circumstances were exceptional, and, with the proviso that he makes, I think we can agree to it. As regards the general Business of the House, I have only had short notice of the right hon. Gentleman's proposal, and it is a week since we set out our original plans. I certainly could not give an undertaking now on the right hon. Gentleman's last point. All we can do is to consider the question through the usual channels and see if we can arrive at some agreement.

Sir H. Williams

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Labour Party only this morning decided on this proposal, without reference to other parties in the House? Is not the majority of the House entitled to be considered in the matter, having regard to the fact that many Members have made arrangements of all sorts for next week? Is it reasonable that one party should suddenly rush in?

Mr. Driberg

With regard to the proposal to adjourn the House for another few weeks, does the right hon. Gentleman realise that most people in the country regard a Recess as merely a holiday—[HON. MEMBERS: "No''] —probably wrongly. It is not a holiday, but most people regard it as such. Is it not damaging to the prestige of Parliament, and also psychologically dangerous to the people of this country, that Parliament should adjourn for another two weeks at such an important moment?

Mr. Eden

I really do not think there can be any misunderstanding. The country understands that during a Recess Members of Parliament have opportunities of going to their constituencies. If there is any doubt, no doubt the hon. Member and others will explain it to their constituents. The procedure which we are now following is exactly the same as we followed last year and the year before. I understand the feelings of the majority of the House, but both majorities and minorities have to be taken into account by the Leader of the House, and, if I am given the opportunity, I will try to come to an arrangement which is satisfactory.

Mr. Gallacher

rose—

Mr. Speaker

We can debate the matter when there is a Motion before the House.

Mr. Gallacher

I wish to raise a question.

Mr. Speaker

We must not break the Rules in anticipation by a Debate at present.