HC Deb 21 March 1893 vol 10 cc677-9
MR. HANBURY (for Sir R. TEMPLE,) Surrey, Kingston

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that during each of the last four years three days or more have been allowed for discussion of the Vote on Account; what time, if any, will be available if the Vote is postponed till Monday the 27th; and whether he will reconsider his decision, and set the Vote down for Thursday or Friday?

MR. W. E. GLADSTONE

The question is totally inaccurate in its statement of facts. It is not the fact that the Vote on Account has occupied the time mentioned. I am not in a position to make any change in the announcement already made, further than is connected with the arrangements made by the Government, so far as they depend on the Government, for the regulation of business. I may state, however, that to-day we propose to introduce the Bill known as the Parish Councils Bill, and after that Order stands the Report of Supply and the introduction of the Ways and Means Bill, which, unless we obtain them at the Morning Sitting, it will be necessary, with a view to compliance with the provisions of the law, to take in the evening. Perhaps that may be avoided. On Wednesday it will be necessary to take a stage in the Ways and Means Bill, which will be placed as the first Order, to avoid any risk of failure. On Thursday will be taken the continuance of the Debate upon the Employers' Liability Bill, and after that measure will come the introduction, if time permits, of the Bill for shortening the duration of Parliaments from seven years to five. On Friday we shall take the Registration Bill for England at 2 o'clock, and afterwards the Registration Bill for Scotland. In case these Bills should not be disposed of on Friday it will be necessary to prosecute them on Monday. If they should be finished on Friday we shall then on Monday take the Vote on Account.

MR. GOSCHEN (St. George's, Hanover Square)

May I ask whether, on the occasion of Morning Sittings being asked for, the right hon. Gentleman did not enter into an engagement that Morning Sittings should only be applied to financial business, to the introduction of Bills, and to the Second Reading of the Employers' Liability Bill?

MR. W. E. GLADSTONE

No, Sir, I made a sort of overture to that effect across the Table to the Opposition, that we were ready to enter into an engagement of that kind, but it was not accepted.

MR. GOSCHEN

I know that my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition is distinctly under the impression that a direct statement was made by the right hon. Gentleman. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman would not wish to force the House if there has been such a statement even in the spirit, if not the letter, and I wish to know whether under these circumstances the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider the question as to the advisability of taking the Second Reading of the Registration Bill?

MR. W. E. GLADSTONE

It appears to me that my right hon. Friend is under an entire misconception. The overtures I made were with a view to a pacific arrangement of the case before the House. The pacific arrangement, however, was declined, and the Opposition voted against the proposal.