ADJOURNMENT DEBATES (CANCELLATION) (Hansard, 16 April 1946)

Mr. Driberģ (Maldon)
I shall detain the House only for a moment or two. I wish to record an expression of regret that, for the second evening running, the subject which had been announced for Debate on the Adjournment has not been taken. My sole object in rising, Mr. Speaker—I make no criticism of my hon. Friends, who no doubt had good reasons for abandoning the Adjournments they had booked—is to ask you if you would be good enough to consider advising hon. Members, now that this Adjournment period has become so much more rigid than it used to be, that if they abandon the Adjournment they have booked, they should cause their name and the subject of their choice to be crossed off the list behind your Chair. It is a very small point, but it would be a matter of some convenience to the House, because the subjects for last night and tonight are of some importance and interest to a number of hon. Members, who may have waited to listen to the discussion. I would ask you, Sir, to consider that when you have time, and perhaps make an announcement about it. Above all, I would ask my hon. Friends to cherish this precious final half-hour of Private Members' time and not to allow any persons, however influential or however beguiling, to coax or to flagellate them into abandoning it.

§ Earl Winterton (Horsham)
I am not sure whether the hon. Member is putting d point of Order, or what he is endeavouring to do. I would like to submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that a Standing Order is a Standing Order and cannot be relaxed. I cannot understand what the hon. Member means. Is he suggesting that the Standing Order should be altered in some way? What is the meaning of his statement?

Mr. Driberģ
I thought I had made my meaning tolerably clear, but for the benefit of the Noble Lord I will endeavour to make it even clearer. Within the last year there has grown up a practice of advance booking of this final half hour, which never used to obtain. The Adjournment period 2654 has become much more rigid than it used to be. Hon. Members now painfully and painstakingly ballot for it day after day, very often without success. The result of this crystallisation of the Adjournment is that the subjects are now announced in advance, as the Noble Lord knows, on the notice-board at the back of Mr. Speaker's Chair. My sole and very modest point is that when a Member decides, for his own good reasons, to abandon his Adjournment, and not endeavour to catch Mr. Speaker's eye, notice of that abandonment should be given to the House by the crossing-off that list of the Member's name and subject.

§ Mr. Dumpleton (St. Albans)
As the Member who was successful in the ballot for the Adjournment this evening, I wish to say a word or two on this point. I say straight away that I have considerable sympathy with my hon. Friend in his disappointment at the loss of an opportunity. There is keen competition for opportunity to speak on the Adjournment. Of course, many hon. Members put down subjects which they wish to raise on the Adjournment, and about which they require more clear information. Perhaps they have been dissatisfied with the reply to a Question. If in the meantime, before the Adjournment is reached, information comes to them, however it may come, I think they have every right to withdraw, if they feel satisfied that there is no need to raise the matter. In withdrawing, I gave due notice to the Chair. I gave my notice to Mr. Deputy-Speaker who was in the Chair at the time, and I believed that I had fulfilled the responsibility attached to me, by so doing.
I think this raises the whole issue of the method of allotting this time. If I am not out of Order, I should like to submit that the question should be considered of whether time allotted by ballot is the most satisfactory method. We put down our names perhaps 20 or 30 times before we are successful in securing an Adjournment. Sometimes the matter we wish to raise has become very much out of date before the time is allotted. If some system of rota could be introduced, that perhaps would be more satisfactory. Then if a Member found he was in a position to withdraw, he could go to the next man on the list and tell him he was at liberty to take his Adjournment. 2655 In that way, an opportunity would not be wasted. I hope this suggestion may be considered, and that a new method may be adopted if at all practicable.

§ Mr. Speaker
All I can say is that I am very grateful to hon. Members for any suggestions for improving the way in which we may discuss matters during the last half-hour. The original point raised by the hon. Member for Maldon (Mr. Driberg) as to the opportunity lost when a Member gives up his rights to talk on the half-hour Adjournment, is a matter which I am quite prepared to consider at any time. I would, however, tell him that it does not seem to be very satisfactory if, at the last minute, a Member gives up his right and no Minister is warned, and, therefore, anyone who takes the place of the Member who first had the Adjournment is merely talking in the air. After all, the important thing is to get a reply, and not to talk in the air. 2656 I would make a further point—and in doing so I do not think I am making a breach of Privilege, because I think the evidence of the Committee has been reported to the House I suggested in my evidence to the Committee on Procedure that I thought if the time went to it o'clock, or 11.15, and the House was still sitting, then, automatically, the half-hour Adjournment Debate ought to lapse. I suggested that because there is the paint that the staff have to get home and I think we ought to consider them. I can assure the hon. Member that, as far as I am concerned, I will consult with any other hon. Members and I welcome any suggestions. If we can get a better system for arranging the half-hour Adjournment, I shall be only too pleased to do so.