HC Deb 31 May 1921 vol 142 cc840-1
Mr. MACQUISTEN

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House in order to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely, "the refusal of the Government to permit this House to discuss the existence of an unconstitutional body—the Liquor Control Board."

I am sure I shall have the almost unanimous support of the House in putting this question.

Viscountess ASTOR

No.

Mr. MACQUISTEN

With the exception, perhaps, of the hon. Member for Plymouth (Viscountess Astor), who, of course, does not wish to discuss it.

Mr. SPEAKER

That is not a Motion which properly comes within the Standing Order. In the first place, it is not a question of urgency. We have had it before us a good long while. In the second place, a Motion to discuss the refusal of an opportunity to debate this question would open the door to Motions for Adjournment every day by hon. Members who would like to have business put down other than that which is put down under the Standing Orders. It is for the Government to arrange the business of the House, subject, of course, to Standing Orders under which it may be interrupted. In these circumstances, I cannot accept the Motion.

Mr. MACQUISTEN

But has not the Government received a request signed by 170 Members for the discussion of this matter, and do you, Sir, ever remember in the history of Parliament a discussion having been refused in such circumstances? Is it not unprecedented?

Mr. SPEAKER

I am not here to be catechised, but I think I can remember an occasion when the Government received a request signed by 300 Members for the discussion of a particular subject.