BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (Hansard, 15 July 1943)

§ Mr. Arthur Greenwood
May I ask the Deputy-Prime Minister whether he will state the Business of the House for the next series of Sittings?

§ Mr. Attlee
The Business will be as follows:
First Sitting Day—Supply (17th Allotted Day), Committee. A Debate will take place on War Pensions.
Second Sitting Day—Supply (18th Allotted Day), Committee. A Debate will take place on Scottish Education; Second Reading of the Town and Country Planning (Interim Development) (Scotland) Bill.
Third Sitting Day—Committee stage of a Supplementary Vote of Credit for War Expenditure; further consideration of the Pensions Appeal Tribunals Bill.
Fourth Sitting Day—Supply (19th Allotted Day), Committee. A Debate will take place on Building Costs; at the hour appointed the Committee stage of all outstanding Supply Votes will be put from the Chair; Report stage of the Supplementary Vote of Credit.
During the week, if there is time, we hope to take the Committee and remaining stages of the Isle of Man (Customs) Bill, and the Second Reading of the Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Bill [Lords] and Water Undertakings Bill [Lords].
We desire to proceed with the Pensions Appeal Tribunals Bill on the Third Sitting Day and hope that we shall be able to conclude the Committee stage and, if possible, the remaining stages, so that the Bill may receive the Royal Assent before the Summer Adjournment.

§ Mr. Greenwood
With regard to the first Sitting Day, in view of the wide interest in the War Pensions White Paper on all sides of the House and the importance of the Government collecting the views of the House on as wide a scale as possible, is it understood that we shall suspend the Rule on that day?

§ Mr. Attlee
Yes, Sir, certainly, the Rule will be suspended on that day.

§ Mr. Greenwood
And not for a specified time only?

§ Mr. Attlee
We will consider what will be most convenient for the House.

§ Sir H. Williams
As it is possible that the White Paper may involve legislation—I am not certain whether it does or not—would it not be possible to take the Debate on a Motion and treat the Supply Business as formal, so that there may be no risk of infringing the technical Rule against discussing legislation on a Supply Day?

§ Mr. Attlee
That matter has been considered and, according to our advice, the Debate will he sufficiently free and will not be hampered in any way.

§ Sir H. Williams
The Debate will be sufficiently free not because of any Ruling but because of the text of the White Paper? Have the Government considered whether the White Paper involves legislation?

§ Mr. Attlee
That is what I said. The Debate will be covering the Ministry of Pensions Vote and the existing Royal Warrant, and that will give sufficient scope to cover all these points.

§ Sir H. Williams
The right hon. Gentleman has not understood the point. It is a well established Rule that on a Supply Day you cannot discuss anything which involves legislation, and as it is proposed to make changes in the pensions system, which may involve legislation, in the event of that proving to be so part of the Debate would be out of Order.

§ Mr. Buchanan
Two points arise in connection with the White Paper, and one of them, I think, must involve legislation. There is a small section dealing with a class of widows getting pensions and their right to supplementary pensions, and I cannot see anything being done about that without some amending legislation. The second point is that we are discussing on the third Sitting Day a Bill dealing with an issue which will be most widely covered by the Debate on the first Sitting Day. I have sufficient regard for Mr. Speaker not to want to put him in a difficult position, and also for myself not to want to see myself in difficulties. 374 I think one of two things might be done; either a Motion put down, or some contact made to secure the consent of Mr. Speaker, or the Chairman of Committees or of the House to our ranging rather more widely than would be the case normally on such an occasion. If the right hon. Gentleman will look at the matter again, I think he will see it is likely there will be cross-currents of legislation involved in our discussions.

§ Mr. Attlee
I am quite willing to look again into the point raised by my hon. Friend; but we did look at it, and I am advised that the procedure adopted will be sufficiently wide, subject to what the Chair may say, to include all the matters that might come up, apart from matters which come purely under the Bill and which will be discussed later in the same series of Sittings.

§ Mr. Tinker
Have the Government considered making a statement on the war situation? If so, when may we expect it?

§ Mr. Attlee
I am afraid I have nothing to say on that subject.

§ Mr. A. Bevan
Is it proposed to bring in a Workmen's Compensation Bill before the summer Recess, as there is considerable concern, particularly in the mining industry, about the delay in introducing an improvement in workmen's compensation?

§ Mr. Attlee
As I understand it, the matter is still being discussed and negotiated, but I doubt whether we are ready to introduce anything before the Recess.

§ Mr. Pickthorn
May I return to the point of Order about the use of Supply Days? May I ask the Deputy-Prime Minister whether he has considered that the more the Rules of Order are stretched to allow particular Debates upon Supply Days—

§ Mr. Speaker
We cannot discuss the general question of the use of Supply Days. The point was in regard to the Debate upon war pensions.

§ Sir A. Southby
Will the Leader of the House consider giving another day to the pensions Debate, in view of there being a large number of speakers anxious to take part in it and in order to avoid the House sitting unduly late?

§ Mr. Attlee
It is very difficult at this stage of the Session to agree to that suggestion, because the House wants to get this matter through before the summer Adjournment and also the Bill dependent upon it. With the long hours of daylight, I think the ordinary extension of the Debate will give adequate time. We shall have to watch it.

§ Mr. Holdsworth
Returning to the point raised by the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan), what objection have the Government so to arranging the forthcoming Debate that it will be impossible for us to get out of Order easily? The Debate ought to be arranged so that we can discuss the subject without the slightest danger.

§ Mr. Attlee
I thought I did inform the hon. Member that we have made inquiries, and I do not think, as at present advised, that there will be anything to hamper the discussion. There is no obvious reason why the Government should wish to stop the discussion. I have also said that I will look at the point raised by the hon. Member.

§ Mr. Quintin Hogg
With regard to the Committee stage of the Pensions Appeal Tribunals Bill, there are a number of Amendments on the Paper from all sides of the House. Would my right hon. Friend consider suspending the Rule on that day, either for a specified period or indefinitely?

§ Mr. Attlee
Yes, I would certainly be prepared to consider doing so.

§ Mr. Driberg
Is the promised Debate upon agriculture to be of a general nature, or will it be confined to the matters dealt with in the recent statement made by the Minister of Agriculture?

§ Mr. Attlee
I am not prepared to announce that at present.

§ Mr. Colegate
May I return for a moment to the war pensions Debate? Is it clear that we shall be able to discuss the subject matter of the Motion standing in my name and in the names of my hon. Friends, without being out of Order?

§ Mr. Attlee
That is rather a matter for Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Colegate
May I ask your guidance, Mr. Speaker? Some of us are still very vague about what we may and may not discuss on that Debate. We do not want to waste the time of the House by preparing for a Debate which may be ruled out of Order. The subject matter of the Motion is important in the administration of war pensions, affecting a great deal of what is in the White Paper. Is there some guidance that you can give me?

§ Mr. Speaker
I thought I had given the House a Ruling on this matter yesterday. The hon. Member will find it in Hansard. As to the hon. Member's Motion, I am afraid I cannot carry it sufficiently clearly in my head to remember the exact wording, and I therefore should not like to say at this moment that it is out of Order. I strongly suspect that all the matters under the Royal Warrant and the Order in Council will be in Order for a Debate in Committee of Supply.

§ Mr. Buchanan
May I be excused if I press you a little further on this point, Sir? Let me take one point that is raised by the White Paper but does not affect a large number of people. It is proposed to make a small number of women chargeable to the Royal Patriotic Fund. I think there is no power under the Royal Warrant to make them so chargeable. That is point number one. Point number two is that some of us take the view that it is a bad system to make them chargeable to a fund which is outwith the control of the House of Commons. We think they ought to be under the control of the Ministry of Pensions or some other Department. If we say so, we shall be suggesting legislation, yet it is the only alternative to the proposition before us. I put it to you, therefore, Sir, that if that matter is to be properly debated, there are bound to be cross-currents which will suggest legislation. All of us are anxious that there should be no impediment to a full Debate.

§ Mr. Bevan
Is it not a fact that, as a consequence of the passing of an Act in 1940, the position on Supply Days is now very doubtful, because the Government can do almost anything they like under that Act by administrative Order, and Bills are brought before the House merely 377 at the convenience of the Government and the convenience of the House? Under the existing law it is actually not necessary to have a Bill at all, because everything can be done by administrative Order. Therefore, anything that falls within an administrative Order can be discussed upon a Supply Day.

§ Mr. Speaker
In reply to the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan), I would remind him that the Deputy Prime Minister said that he would look into the point raised, and I have no doubt that he will do so. The hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) is correct in saying that most things which can be done by Order are in Order on a Supply Day.

Commander Bower
Will there be a Debate before the Recess upon the White Paper on education?

§ Mr. Attlee
Perhaps the hon. Member will await a statement which I understand the President of the Board of Education will make upon the next Sitting Day.