BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. (Hansard, 1 August 1923)

51. Colonel NEWMAN
asked the Prime Minister whether it is intended, when the House reassembles, to proceed with the further stages of the Exemption of Sewers from Rating Bill?

§ 55. Mr. PETO
asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the widespread interest among all classes in the question, he intends to give facilities in the Autumn Session for passing the Bill introduced by the hon. and learned Member for York to check seditious teaching to children in Proletarian Sunday schools?

§ The PRIME MINISTER
I cannot at this stage make any promise in regard to facilities for private Bills during the Autumn Session.

Colonel NEWWAN
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this Bill refers to the question of the exemption of sewers from rating?

§ The PRIME MINISTER
The same answer will apply.

Mr. J. RAMSAY MacDONALD
Could the Prime Minister tell us whether he proposes to publish any Papers regarding foreign relations and negotiations which will assist us in our Debate to-morrow?

§ The PRIME MINISTER
I am afraid it will be impossible to publish any by to-morrow, partly because the number of Papers it will be desirable to publish is considerable and the latest of them have only just been received, and to publish the replies from our Allies would require their permission. I am afraid, much as I regret it, that it will be impossible to do that by to-morrow.

Captain BENN
Will any Papers relating to the Lausanne Treaty be available to-day?

§ Mr. McNEILL
I am afraid they cannot be ready to-day. We are doing all we can to get them printed as quickly as possible, but there is a very large amount to be done and I have only just seen the proof. I hope to have them to-morrow.

§ Sir F. BANBURY
Is there to be a discussion about the Ruhr to-morrow?

§ The PRIME MINISTER
That rests with the Opposition.

§ Mr. HARRIS
Is it not a fact that the Lausanne Treaty had to be confirmed by the Angora Assembly? Why should the Mother of Parliaments be in a worse position than the Angora Assembly?

§ Mr. McNEILL
I am not aware that it is.

Mr. MacDONALD
May I further ask the Prime Minister whether he can announce the business to be taken during the first week after the Summer Recess?

§ The PRIME MINISTER
The usual Motion will be put down to-morrow for the beginning of the business after the Recess.
The business for Tuesday and Wednesday (13th and 14th November) will be the Workmen's Compensation Bill, Report and Third Reading.
On Thursday, 15th November: Second Reading of the War Charges (Validity) Bill.
On Friday, 16th November: Committee stages of the Pre-War Pensioners and Trade Facilities Money Resolutions.

Captain BENN
May I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury if he will undertake, so far as it is within his power, that the House shall not be counted out before 5 o'clock?

§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Commander Eyres-Monsell)
I think that would be for the 1482 general convenience of the House. We will do our best to keep a House, though I cannot guarantee it.

§ Mr. PRINGLE
I think there are other considerations which arise in connection with this Motion. It is quite true it contains the arrangement which has been arrived at in the caste of one or two previous Adjournment sittings, but the conditions to-morrow are very different from previous Adjournments. In the first place I understand we are to have a discussion on the Ruhr, based upon a statement by the Prime Minister, secondly there is to be a discussion on the Lausanne negotiations, and in addition we have had an announcement from the Prime Minister to-day that his statement on the relations of the Admiralty and the Air Force is to be made tomorrow at Question Time. There is, therefore, a third subject upon which a number of Members may wish to address the House. We have three first class subjects of debate and, in the circumstances, to limit the sitting to 5 o'clock will be imposing an undue restriction upon the rights of Members who may wish to take part in the Debate. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] I understand there are hon. Members opposite who have no interest in such important concerns and who treat this matter with derision. After all, we know that the situation in regard to the Ruhr is an extremely delicate one. and our relations with France are giving very grave concern to hon. Members in various parts of the House. We are to have no Papers before this sitting. We shall only know what the situation is when we have the words of the Prime Minister's statement. It is not a matter the interest in which is confined to this side of the House, but I believe there are hon. Members on the other side who are also gravely concerned about the present position. The House is to rise automatically at 5 o'clock. Those who wish to go away can go away, but undoubtedly the Prime Minister will make a speech of considerable importance, and it may take a considerable time. The Leader of the Opposition will be desirous of speaking, and I think the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Paisley (Mr. Asquith) will also speak. [HON. MEMBERS: "Pringle!"] However surprising it may be to hon. Members opposite, I have no 1483 inention of speaking. [HON. MEMBERS: "Shame!"]
In view of that expression of opinion, I have no doubt that I shall reconsider my decision. I know that there are certain hon. Members on the back benches on the other side of the House who have been putting questions on this matter and who will probably also wish to state their views. If that be the course of debate on the first topic and there is then a discussion on the Lausanne negotiations, it is obvious, should the need arise, that there will be no opportunity for those hon. Members who are interested in the very important issue of Air policy, in reference to which the decision is to be announced for the first time to-morrow. I suggest, therefore, that the Prime Minister might withdraw the last part of the Motion. It might turn out that in the circumstances the Debate could conclude at 5 o'clock, but I think he might perfectly well trust to an arrangement being made for the adjournment at a reasonable hour, and at the same time secure the rights of private Members who may wish to raise a discussion on any of the important issues. It is not with any desire to prolong the Debate unnecessarily that I make this suggestion, but simply to secure that on the adjournment to-morrow, when we are parting for a very considerable time, that hon. Members in all parts of the House should have a fair opportunity of putting their views before the House and Government on all these three important issues. I think it is a fair suggestion that I am making, and I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will consider it.

§ Viscount CURZON
I desire to make an appeal to the Prime Minister. He has told us that to-morrow he is going to announce a decision with which pretty well the whole future of the Royal Navy and the Air Force may very well be wrapped up. It is a most important issue for the Navy, and it is an extremely important issue for the country. For the last two years this matter has been under investigation by experts of all descriptions, and the decision has been delayed until to-day or to-morrow—at any rate, it is going to be announced to-morrow—and, so far as I can understand from what has been said this afternoon, there will be practically no opportunity of discussing this important 1484 decision to-morrow. We have been told that a Debate is to take place on the Ruhr and on the Lausanne Conference, and I fail to see that, under those conditions, there will be any opportunity whatever to discuss this decision of the Government. I would like to appeal to the Prime Minister—I do not know how-it could be done—whether he could not by arrangement with the Opposition allow a reasonable time for discussion of the Government's decision on the question of the Navy and Air policy. We do hope that the Prime Minister will be able to see that we do have a reasonable opportunity, at any rate, for discussion, and, if need be, of making our views and our attitude clear, when the Government announce their decision to-morrow upon this great stroke of policy.

§ Commander BELLAIRS
I do not see how, if the Ruhr discussion and the Lausanne discussion take place tomorrow, we are ever to get an adequate discussion on the question of the Air as well, and I would appeal to the Prime Minister. It may be that, from the point of view of a large number of Members, the Government are going to come to what we would consider a very pernicious decision, and we may wish to challenge that decision. There will be no opportunity of challenging it to-morrow. Would he, therefore, give us an opportunity of challenging the decision when we reassemble in the autumn? I would point out to the Prime Minister that we were promised a Committee of Inquiry on the 16th March, 1922. The House remained in entire ignorance of the fact that that Committee had never sat, and we have been fobbed off until the very last day of the Session, when we can have no real opportunity of challenging any decision to which they may come. It is only fair that we should have the whole of the facts before us discussed in this House, and, if we think it necessary, of challenging the decision of the Government. I do not know what that decision may be. It may be that it will involve no discussion at all. It may be satisfactory. But, if it be unsatisfactory, surely we ought to have an assurance that we shall be able when we meet in the autumn to challenge that decision by a Motion in this House. Owing to the promise of a 1485 Committee, given on the 16th March, 1922, there has been no real discussion of this matter at all, because we thought that it was under investigation all last year. I do not know who is the culprit or who is responsible for a direct breach of faith with this House in the fact that no Committee sat last year. I know that the Admiralty repeatedly asked for this Committee. My point, however, is that we did not raise any discussion in this House, because a Committee was supposed to be sitting. We were again promised a Committee this year, and, although the United States Government managed to carry out an inquiry in ten days, the whole of the Session has gone, and we can have no real discussion tomorrow on the issue. Therefore, I do most earnestly appeal to the Prime Minister, in the interests of fair play, that a discussion should be given to us on this very important question at an early date in the autumn.

§ Sir F. BANBURY
I hope that the Government will accede to the request made by my Noble and gallant Friend the Member for South Battersea (Viscount Curzon) and my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Maidstone (Commander Bellairs). I do not want to go into the question whether there has been a breach of promise or unnecessary delay. I do not think that the delay makes very much difference. But I do think that the House ought to have an opportunity of discussing such an important matter. I think it is a very reasonable request of my hon. and gallant Friend to make, that when we meet in the autumn there should be a day fixed on which this very important matter should be discussed.

§ Mr. PETO
I desire to make an appeal to hon. Members opposite in support of what my Noble and gallant Friend the Member for South Battersea (Viscount Curzon) and my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Maidstone (Commander Bellaire) have just said. It is obviously for the convenience of the whole House that it should rise, in accordance with the announcement made by the Prime Minister, to-morrow, and it is also obvious that no occasion in the autumn would be as appropriate for the discussion of this question of the Naval Air Service as to-morrow immediately after the Prime Minister's announcement. 1486 I therefore appeal to hon. Members opposite to let us have to-morrow for this discussion. The question of the Ruhr has been debated no less than six times during the present Session. It is a subject about which very crucial and critical negotiations are now being conducted by the Government, and is, therefore, one on which I should think the least said in this House the soonest mended. With regard to Lausanne, that is at any rate a fait accompli and the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has just informed the House that the Papers cannot be ready in time for any Debate to-morrow. Under these circumstances, I suggest to my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone (Mr. Pringle) that it is only necessary for him and few Members opposite to adhere to their original intention of not intervening in the Debate so as to leave us full time to discuss the important question of the Government's policy with regard to the Navy and the Air.

Mr. MacDONALD
Might I just express a view in a sentence or two which I hope the Prime Minister will take into account? It is perfectly true that an agreement was come to that we should adjourn tomorrow at 5 o'clock. The statement which the Prime Minister made earlier in the day rather changes the situation. It may be quite right, as the hon. Member for Barnstaple (Mr. Peto) has observed, that we have discussed the Ruhr, and that Lausanne is a fait accompli, but those are the two subjects which we were to discuss up to 5 o'clock.

§ Mr. PETO
I only made an appeal to hon. Gentlemen opposite.

Mr. MacDONALD
At any rate, that was the arrangement. Now, if we are going to discuss the Air as well, it is perfectly certain that the Prime Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury will not hold any party in this House to an agreement which has been so altered in its conditions. I shall be always very glad to do anything that I can to facilitate business, but I think the Prime Minister will see that to add a Debate on the Air to the two subjects that have already been raised, and which alone were the subject of the 5 o clock agreement, does change things in such a way that it might be convenient to all parties to leave out the last words of the Motion.

§ The PRIME MINISTER
I think it would be a mistake to alter the wording of this Motion, which has been put down after careful consideration, in accordance with the Motion that proved very useful to all parties concerned at the close of last Session. The choice of subjects, of course, is not for me, but I have no hesitation in telling the House that I frankly accede to the very reasonable request of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Maidstone (Commander Bellairs). The matter of the Air and the Navy shall be discussed soon after we re-assemble in the autumn. There are very good reasons for discussing it then rather than having a discussion, which might go to a late hour, on the day of Adjournment after many Members had left. I purpose making a statement to-morrow, and that statement must be of some length, because the matter is somewhat complicated and difficult. I am perfectly ready to publish, as soon as the printing can be done, the whole of the Report which was submitted to the Government to enable them to come to a decision, and I think it would be of the greatest service to hon. Members who might wish to take part in the discussion to be familiar with the Report which formed the basis of the discussion on which the decision was reached.

§ Mr. PRINGLE
Will this decision be actually put into operation at once?

§ The PRIME MINISTER
This particular decision, as so many Executive decisions, does not need the confirmation of the House.

§ Mr. PRINGLE
I know that, but I want to know whether it will be put into operation at once?

§ Viscount CURZON
Will the form of the Motion be such as to enable a vote to be taken upon it if necessary?

§ The PRIME MINISTER
I do not rule that out, but I should like to consider it between now and then, and I shall be glad if my hon. and gallant Friend will communicate with me on the subject.