HC Deb 17 May 1938 vol 336 cc227-9
Mr. Attlee

May I ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can make any statement with regard to business?

Sir J. Simon

I have to inform the House that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister regrets that he will not be well enough to be in his place on Thursday. The Debate on the Motion of the Leader of the Opposition with regard to Air Defences which was announced for that day, will be postponed. The Debate will probably take place next week, but a further statement will be made later. On Thursday we propose to take the Second Reading of the Herring Industry Bill and the Committee stage of the necessary Money Resolution. If there is time, we shall take the remaining stages of the Patents, Etc. (International Conventions) Bill [Lords].

Mr. Attlee

May I ask when the Money Resolution in connection with the Herring Industry Bill will be on the Order Paper?

Sir J. Simon

It will appear on the Order Paper to-morrow.

Mr. Wedgwood Benn

Who will take the Prime Minister's place during the right hon. Gentleman's indisposition in dealing with Foreign Office questions?

Sir J. Simon

The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

Mr. Benn

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that at the end of February, the Prime Minister gave us a most specific promise that he would be good enough to be present and to deal with all matters of importance arising out of foreign affairs? In those circumstances, is it not natural for the Deputy-Leader of the House or some other Minister of Cabinet rank to undertake that duty?

Sir J. Simon

I hardly think that when the Prime Minister gave that undertaking to the House, he was understood to undertake also never to be absent on any occasion through indisposition.

Mr. Benn

May I appeal to you, Mr. Speaker? You will remember that when this question was raised the same opinion was expressed in different quarters of the House as to the importance of having an authoritative spokesman to deal with foreign affairs. We all regret, of course, the absence of the Prime Minister, but, at the same time, may I ask you, Sir, whether that pledge can be fulfilled, if an Under-Secretary is left in charge, and whether it does not fall to the acting Leader of the House to take the place of the Prime Minister in those circumstances?

Mr. Speaker

It is the case, certainly, that when a Minister and Under-Secretary are both in this House, the Under-Secretary invariably answers questions in the absence of the Minister, and I presume that that would apply in this case. I hope, however, that it will not be long before the Prime Minister is back in his place.

Mr. Attlee

May I put it to you, Mr. Speaker, that in matters of foreign affairs it is difficult in the present situation to get an authoritative answer from the Under-Secretary, who has no responsibility for policy, and that the Prime Minister gave his assurance in response to a number of complaints about the Foreign Secretary being in another place? There is, therefore, a strong case that there should be someone responsible on the Treasury Bench. Too often in this House we are left with only Under-Secretaries on the Front Bench with no Ministers with them at all.

Mr. Speaker

That is outside my province.

Mr. Benn

May I ask the Chancellor what is his reason for refusing to come up and face Foreign Office questions?

Sir W. Davison

Would it not be exactly the same position if the Foreign Secretary were in this House and were indisposed?

Sir A. Knox

Are not all these questions put because the Under-Secretary has proved himself as efficient as any Cabinet Minister?