BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. (Hansard, 20 December 1929)

§ Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE
I rise just to draw the attention of the Government and the House to the fact that the Government are moving this Motion on a date when the Live Stock Clubs Bill, a Bill to assist agriculture, is down for Second Reading. While it is true that they are taking the time in order to discuss a subject which the Opposition have very much at heart, namely, unemployment, and have put down the salary of the Lord Privy Seal in order that the subject may be discussed, at the same time I should like to make an appeal to the Government that if to-day is not available for the discussion of the Live Stock Clubs Bill, they should find another day for it. I would also remind the Government of their appeal to Members on this side of the House for contributions towards a solution of the agricultural problem. It would not be in order to discuss the merits of the Live Stock Clubs Bill, but I may remind the House that it is a Bill to encourage live stock clubs for the labouring classes in rural areas.
There is a second point in my appeal. Last night, I am sure, supporters of the 1782 Government felt that they were voting for a Bill that was in the interests of the miners. The Live Stock Clubs Bill is designed for the benefit of agricultural labourers and smallholders. Last night there was a distinction made between the wages of agricultural labourers and the workers in the coal mines. I am not going into that now, because it would be out of order, but I would remind the Government that the wages of agricultural labourers are very low, and that anything that can be done to assist agricultural labourers in the rural areas should receive our consideration. For these reasons I ask the Government either to find another day for the Live Stock Clubs Bill or to let it slip through.

§ The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Mr. J. H. Thomas)
I understand that the arrangement of business to-day was made through the usual channels and that agreement was reached. It is perfectly true that the Bill to which the hon. and gallant Gentleman has referred is an important Bill. We understood, however, that there was a great anxiety to discuss my salary to-day, and we had to choose between meeting that anxiety and dropping the private Member's Bill. I am sure that the point raised by the hon. and gallant Gentleman will be met, and that a day for his Bill will be found before Easter. I can assure him of that.

§ Sir DOUGLAS NEWTON
I associate myself with the dignified protest which has been made by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Louth (Lieut.-Colonel Heneage). Ever since I have been a Member of the House I have watched the unequal struggle between the back bench Member and the Government which seeks to take his time and to interfere with his freedom and independence. No doubt the Government supporters, flushed with the success of last night will again succeed in overwhelming the private Member and forcing him into submission. But private Members still claim some rights and privileges. We cannot be expected always to remain calm and passive. We are really desirous of pushing forward a Bill which we believe will be to the benefit of the community as a whole. We must not always be prevented from making our modest contribution to that end. We private 1783 Members to-day are being asked rather too much, and I hope that the Government will not misconstrue our patience in matters of this kind as evidence of our weakness or of our desire tamely to submit to whatever the Government may do.
It is most unusual for a Government to take a specific day in the way that the Government are taking this day. They ought to have brought forward rather more potent and coherent arguments in support of their action. We have been told repeatedly that farming must be made to pay. For a long time we have waited for a declaration of Government policy in the matter. The Live Stock Clubs Bill would have afforded an opportunity for the Minister of Agriculture to declare his policy, or, even better, to do something really constructive for the industry of agriculture by supporting the Bill itself. The Government have not chosen to do that. On the contrary, the whole weight of the Government has been used to smother this attempt on the part of back bench Members to benefit the agricultural industry. I wish to register a very strong protest against their action.
It is only by the promotion of Bills of this kind that we get away from the rigid party machine; it is only thus that we are able to assert our independence. Too much is being asked of us back bench Members. We have already seen a revolt on the other side. If it had spread to back bench Members on this side they would have received more consideration. The Government's conduct of proceedings is destroying the usefulness of the ordinary private Member. I protest against the ruthless exclusion of private Members from a part in the business of the House. I ask the Government to allow the Live Stock Clubs Bill to proceed. It will take only a few minutes. It passed its First Reading unopposed and was welcomed by all parties. I ask the Government to allow the Bill to proceed. Otherwise I shall oppose the Motion now before the House.

Commander Sin BOLTON EYRES MONSELL
I intervene for a moment, not to discuss the merits of the case raised by my hon. Friends, but to say that I cannot allow the remark of the Lord Privy Seal, that this arrangement 1784 was made through the usual channels, to pass. It is true that I was consulted about the programme of business and that I gave my advice to the Government, and that the advice was to drop the Coal Bill. In view of what happened last night, I cannot help thinking that it would have been better if my advice had been adopted. As my advice was not adopted, I merely awaited orders for the dragooning of the Opposition, and the arrangement which exists between us as regards this matter is the sort of arrangement which exists between a man who is going to be hanged and his executioner.

§ Colonel GRETTON
Some of us on this side are anxious to understand what are the Government's intentions in regard to the Bill which stands first on the Order Paper to-day. We understand that the Government undertake to restore the private Member's day which they propose to take now, on some date before Easter, but when they restore that day do they intend that the Order Paper should be as it is to-day, and that the Bill of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Louth (Lieut.-Colonel Heneage) should stand as the first Order. We want to be perfectly clear as to the Government's attitude on this matter so that the House may know exactly where it stands.

§ Mr. ROSBOTHAM
There are Members on this side of the House as keenly interested in agriculture as hon. Members opposite, and to show that there is no urgent importance attaching to this Bill I may mention that there is a live stock club in the parish in which I was born, and that its minutes date back to 1829. It is an amazing fact that hon. Members opposite should show such an interest in agriculture this morning when they have been in power for nearly five years, and have had the opportunity of passing Bills of this kind during that time.

§ Sir GEORGE PENNY
I think the fact that a live stock club was started so long ago in the constituency of the hon. Member who has just spoken, and has been such a success, is all the more reason why this Bill should be given a chance to go through, and I hope the Government will consider it.

Commander WILLIAMS
This Motion has not yet been passed, but in the ordinary course of the procedure of the House I suppose it will be passed. On the other hand, I think that purely as a matter of courtesy it would have been much better if we had had the Minister of Agriculture here this morning. It shows a disrespect and a lack of courtesy to the House which is always being shown by hon. Members on the Front Bench opposite.—[HON. MEMBERS: "He is here"]—and I very strongly protest against the continued lateness of the Minister of Agriculture in his attendance on every occasion. I have no desire, however, to delay getting the Lord Privy Seal on to the carpet where he can make some more mistakes for the Government.

§ Mr. SMITHERS
I wish to enter an emphatic protest against the taking of Private Members' time by the Government to-day, and I do so as the representative of a constituency where clubs of the kind dealt with in the Private Members Bill, which stands first on the Order Paper, would have been most useful. Furthermore, although the discussion on that Bill would have been limited, we should have had a chance of hearing from the Minister of Agriculture at least a part of his policy. The taking of this day is due to the Government's own fault, and I was glad to hear the Chief Opposition Whip take up the statement of the Lord Privy Seal. One could understand the taking of Private Members' time at the end of a Session, when it might be necessary to do so in order to get important business through, but one cannot understand it at the beginning of the Session and at the beginning of a Parliament. The Government have tried to put too much important business through in a short time, and I as a humble back bencher—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] Hon. Members opposite when they have been longer here will realise the necessity of Private

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE
I feel bound, inasmuch as this day has been given by the Government for the discussion of our Motion, to make clear the circumstances. I express no opinion about the merits of the Bill of the hon. and gallant Member for Louth (Lieut.-Colonel Heneage). I am very sorry that I have not had an opportunity since last night of reading it, but I understood that no balloted Bill had been allocated to this day, and since the Government announced that they would give a vacant day for the purpose of discussing the Motion on unemployment which we proposed, we gladly accepted that offer.

§ Colonel GRETTON
May I have an answer to my question as to whether the Government will find a convenient day with this Bill as the first Order on the Paper?

§ The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Ramsay MacDonald)
I rise with great readiness to reply. As hon. Members know, Friday is a day essentially for Private Members, but Private Members must ballot for them, and merely slipping in a Bill on a Friday, for which no ballot has been made, or at any rate for which no place has been taken in a ballot by any Private Bill, is not carrying out the Rules of House. Therefore, what has to be done is that the Government, if this day is taken, will have to restore it, but they will restore it as an open day for which hon. Members will ballot. Hon. Members will ballot for the restored Friday, and must take their chance in the ballot.