HC Deb 01 October 1942 vol 383 cc932-6
Mr. Arthur Greenwood

May I ask the Leader of the House to state the forthcoming Business?

The Lord Privy Seal (Sir Stafford Cripps)

The forthcoming Business will be as follows:

First Sitting Day—The Debate on the coal situation will be concluded.

Second Sitting Day—The Adjournment of the House will be moved in order to give an opportunity for a Debate upon the First Report from the Public Accounts Committee, dealing with contracts. At the end of the Debate we shall ask leave to withdraw the Motion for the Adjournment and take the Committee and remaining stages of the Prolongation of Parliament Bill and of the Local Elections Bill, if there is time.

Third Sitting Day-Second Reading of the India and Burma (Temporary and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.

Mr. Greenwood

May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether in the Debate on the India and Burma Bill you will allow an opportunity for a Debate on a rather wider basis?

Mr. Speaker

I have given some consideration to this matter and can only say that as there have been two previous occasions when in similar circumstances a wider discussion was allowed than would have been strictly in Order, I propose therefore to allow a wide discussion in the Debate on the India Bill. I think, however, that the Minister in making his statement should connect as much as he can the proposals in the Bill with the history and the future government of India.

Mr. Greenwood

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for what I may call with the deepest respect a very wise Ruling.

Mr. Maxton

On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker, with regard to your Ruling about the discussion on the India and Burma Bill. Are we to take it that this slightly out of Order, almost in Order, Debate on this Bill about Indian administration and Burmese matters is to take the place of the Indian Debate which the Prime Minister promised the House, when there would be an opportunity for the House to cast a vote definitely for or against the new policy in India?

Dr. Haden Guest

Is not the House to have an opportunity of debating the Motion in the name of the hon. Member for Abingdon (Sir R. Glyn), which will allow us to express a clear-cut view by a Division whether hon. Members approve of the Prime Minister's statement on India, or not? Is it not desirable that there should be a definite opportunity for the House to express its opinion?

Sir S. Cripps

The Bill which was introduced by the Secretary of State for India yesterday is an urgent Measure, which must he dealt with by the House within the course of the next few days, and it is not considered advisable, in view of the fact that there has already been one day's Debate on the Indian situation—[HON; MEMBERS: "No, it was on the Adjournment."] It was on the Adjournment, but it was on the Indian situation as well—to have a third Debate on the same subject matter. As Mr. Speaker has said, the Debate on the Bill will be a broad Debate, in which reference can be made to general matters with which hon. Members are concerned.

Mr. Shinwell

In view of the fact that the Prime Minister gave consent to certain hon. Members putting down a Motion supporting his statement on India, is it not desirable to proceed with it? Would it not be of interest to the House to know what the views of the right hon. and learned Gentleman are on the Prime Minister's statement?

Sir S. Cripps

It might or might not be of interest to the House to hear my views, but it is perfectly possible for the House, if hon. Members wish to vote on the matter, to vote on the Second Reading of the Bill which has been brought forward.

Mr. Maxton

Are we to understand that Government policy on India, which took such a sharp turn in the last few weeks, is not to be submitted to this House for approval? Are we to understand that the Prime Minister makes his own statement and his own policy and consults nobody at all?

Sir S. Cripps

I am not aware of any change, sharp or otherwise, in the policy in the last few weeks or days.

Sir R. Glyn

Are we to understand that the Debate will be without prejudice to the rights of hon. Members to discuss the matter on the Motion which stands on the Paper?

Sir S. Cripps

It is always without prejudice, of course.

Sir R. Glyn

I mean by that that a day will be allotted by the Government, if the forthcoming Debate is not satisfactory?

Sir S. Cripps

We had better wait and see how the Debate goes.

Mr. Shinwell

Does that mean that the statement made by the Prime Minister on India is also to be the subject of discussion during the Debate?

Sir S. Cripps

It is a matter for Mr. Speaker to say whether that specific question can be raised, as it has already been raised on one occasion before.

Mr. Shinwell

I am much obliged to my right hon. and learned Friend. I put it to Mr. Speaker now, whether that matter can be raised?

Mr. Speaker

It is impossible for me to say at the moment whether that matter can be raised in the Debate. I must see first whether anybody raises it.

Dr. Haden Guest

Would it not be desirable for the House to have an opportunity to decide for or against the Motion put down by the hon. Member for Abingdon? It is a perfectly straight Motion. A great many of my hon. Friends would like to vote against it, and no doubt a number of hon. Gentlemen opposite wish to vote for it. Is the House afraid of showing whatever division of opinion there may be?

Mr. Maxton

Would a reasoned Amendment to the Motion for the Second Reading of the Bill, protesting against the imprisonment of leaders of the Indian Congress Party and expressing regret that complete independence has not been granted to India, be regarded by you, Sir, as a competent Amendment to the Motion for the Second Reading of that Bill?

Mr. Speaker

I would like to see that Amendment on paper.

Mr. Maxton

You will have the opportunity, Sir.

Lieut.-Colonel Elliot

Would the Government consider issuing a White Paper showing the present position of the particular contracts to which reference is made in the Report of the Public Accounts Committee?

Sir S. Cripps

Yes, Sir. The Government propose to issue a White Paper, and I hope it will be in the hands of hon. Members by the end of this week.

Mr. Greenwood

May I ask my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Privy Seal whether he saw a report in the Press about to-day's Debate which appeared to show that there has been an alteration in the procedure? The Debate was asked for by my hon. Friends on the Adjournment, and it was assumed that we should open it, but, according to a Press statement of last night, the Debate is to be opened by the Minister of Fuel and Power.

Sir S. Cripps

I understand that the arrangement which was contemplated was that the Minister should open the Debate with a record of his administration during the last few months and that then the House would have an opportunity of discussing it, in the light of the facts which he will have laid before us.

Mr. Greenwood

I am not raising any question about the Minister of Fuel and Power. My recollection of the usual channels is that, as we asked for the Debate, we should be granted the usual right to open it.

Sir S. Cripps

I should be very sorry if there had been any misunderstanding, but I think the usual channels were under the impression that there was an indication that it would be convenient to have the matter of coal debated, and as it had already been promised some time ago that the Minister should make a statement on the progress of events in his Department, it was thought that he should open the Debate by making a statement.

Mr. Greenwood

My end of the usual channels has not that impression at all.

Mr. Pickthorn

How did the statement come to be in the Press?

Sir S. Cripps

I cannot answer the question. I did not see the matter in the Press, and I have no knowledge of how the Press knew anything about it.

Mr. Shinwell

In view of what happened on a recent occasion, would it not be possible, after the Minister of Fuel and Power has opened the Debate, at a somewhat late hour which may impinge on the meal hour, for the House to suspend its Sittings for one hour after hearing his statement and then to resume the Debate?

Sir S. Cripps

I suppose the hon. Member is at liberty to make that Motion, if Mr. Speaker will accept it.

Mr. Austin Hopkinson

In order to avoid a repetition of that unfortunate incident, could not you, Sir, call, as second speaker, someone who is not a member of the Front Opposition Bench?

    c936
  1. NATIONAL EXPENDITURE 21 words