HC Deb 22 February 1944 vol 397 cc660-2
Mr. Levy

On a point of Business. As the Chairman of Ways and Means has put down the Water Bills for the third Sitting Day and as a number of hon. Members want to discuss them, would not the Leader of the House be good enough to suspend the Rule on that day so as to make it easier for as many as possible of us to speak?

The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Eden)

I shall be glad to give consideration to that.

Mr. Granville

Is there any reason why the War Debate should end only two hours after the usual time? A great number of back benchers will want to get in and, in view of the importance of the Debate, some of the time available will be taken up by Front Benchers. Would the Leader of the House consider whether the Debate should not go later?

Mr. Eden

This matter was raised last Thursday and I thought then that I had the assent of the House when I proposed an extra two hours. There will be no other Front Bench speeches, except the winding up speech on the next Sitting Day.

Mr. Bowles

May I draw attention to the fact that we spent six hours debating one Clause of the Education Bill and that we are to have only 12 hours to discuss the whole war, and the foreign situation?

Mr. Eden

There are two days to discuss the whole situation. I am satisfied that it is a fair allotment.

Mr. Gallacher

Is it not a fact that, when we were asked to come to a decision to fix certain hours for the Adjournment, the right hon. Gentleman told the House that he would not use this power unnecessarily, but that on almost every occasion since it has been used, instead of simply suspending the Standing Order? Why not do justice to the House and suspend the Standing Order?

Mr. Eden

I am satisfied that the arrangement I have made does suit the general convenience of the House.

Mr. Shinwell

While agreeing to the arrangement for to-day, namely, two hours' suspension, might I ask whether it would not be appropriate to suspend the Rule for an hour or two on the next Sitting Day?

Mr. Eden

No, Sir. I did explicitly say that I would arrange a suspension today and that I hoped that the House would agreed to finish at a normal time on the next Sitting Day. I wish to stand by that arrangement.

Mr. Stokes

If it should turn out that there are a number of Front Bench speakers from this side of the House, would the right hon. Gentleman reconsider his decision as to the length of the Sitting?

Mr. Eden

I am responsible for only one front.

Mr. Stokes

I thought it was the same front.

Mr. Bowles

When the right hon. Gentleman moves the Motion referring to this matter, would it be in Order to move an Amendment to delete the last seven words?

Mr. Speaker

No, this Motion has to be put without Amendment or Debate.

Mr. Stephen

Would the Leader of the House consider altering the form of the Motion on which the Debate is being held, to a Motion of Confidence in the Government?

Sir Irvinģ Albery

In view of the fact that the Leader of the House has announced that only one Front Bench speaker will speak from the Government Bench, I desire to ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether you would consider it appropriate that only one should speak from the opposite Front Bench also? Otherwise those Members who have the privilege of sitting on the Front Bench on the opposite side of the House would be getting the privileges of Front Bench speakers, and those of back benchers at the same time.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman will realise that I have my difficulties too. I daresay that hon. Members will take notice of what has been said.

Mr. Gallacher

Further to that point of Order. I want to ask you, Mr. Speaker, in connection with this Debate, whether you have any power and authority to limit the speeches to a reasonable time.

Mr. Speaker

No, I have not. Sometimes I wish I had.