ELECTRICITY (SUPPLY) ACTS. (Hansard, 19 February 1924)

§ The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Mr. Gosling)
I desire to point out that, of the 32 Orders which have appeared or still appear on the Order Paper, 28 were made by the hon. and gallant Member foe Chatham (Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabaeon) when he was responsible for the Ministry of Transport. Eleven of these were presented to the House of Commons and appeared on the Order Paper of the 13th November last. I cannot, of course, give the reasons why the hon. and gallant Gentleman refrained from asking for confirmation of those Orders during November, but I am aware that the failure to do so has occasioned considerable inconvenience in the localities affected, and and has delayed the commencemnt of useful work and the supply of electricity to consumers. I am now merely attempting to secure the approval of the House, at the earliest opportunity, of the action of the hon. and gallant Gentleman. I should like to add that I have been ready all day yesterday and to-day with the papers in the House, following what I believe is the usual practice, in case any hon. Member had any criticism to offer, but not a soul has been near me during these two days. I am quite prepared to give an undertaking, so far as I can, that Orders for which I am responsible shall not accumulate again, and in future I will only deal with a few Orders at a time. In these circumstances I hope the House will allow the Orders to go through.

§ Commander EYRES-MONSELL
The Minister for Transport does riot quite understand our objections to this large number of Electricity Orders. We are quite willing to see them passed, but we do not like having this extraordinary number of 32 put down on one night. Since I have been in this House 11 have always tried to be a champion of private Members, and private Members have not 1702 got many opportunities of making themselves heard. I think they will ill want this opportunity in future. When you get a Socialist Government, with a reactionary Front Bench, there will be many questions that Members will wish to discuss. I want to give an opportunity to the hon. and learned Member for Penistone to make his voice heard. We only have Tuesday and Wednesday evenings and Fridays, and I was rather horrified by a hint from a Member of the Front Bench that even those opportunities may be encroached upon in the near future. This makes it ail the more important that time may be given to private Members to raise questions they wish to raise. When a Government puts down 32 of those Orders at a time when private Members wish to raise questions on the adjournment, it is a new form of obstruction.

§ Mr. SPEAKER
I think there is some reason in the point raised. I consider that ten m one evening would be a reasonable limit.

§ Sir CHARLES STARMER
On a point of Order. I would ask that the last Order should be one of the ten included this evening. It has been held up for a long time. They want to get on with the work, and to get light in a seaside place. This Order was held up for a change of Government.

Major-General SEELY
Is it not quite unusual and contrary to all custom in this House to hold up public works by obstructing these Orders?

§ Mr. SPEAKER
I think my suggestion is a reasonable one. We should be able to clear them off to-morrow.

§ Mr. G. BALFOUR
On that point of Order. There are 22 Orders on the Paper, and I think it might be a good arrangement that they should be divided into 11 to-night and 11 to-morrow night.