HC Deb 23 January 1947 vol 432 cc371-80
Mr. Churchill

May I ask the acting Leader of the House if he will give us Some account of the Business for next week?

The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. Arthur Greenwood)

Before announcing the Business for next week, I have to inform the House that at the beginning of Business on Monday next, 27th January, it is proposed to move a Motion for a humble Address to His Majesty on the occasion of the Royal visit to the Union of South Africa.

The Business for next week will be as follows:

Monday and Tuesday, 27th and 28th January—Second Reading of the Agriculture Bill, and Committee stage of the necessary Money Resolutions.

Wednesday and Thursday, 29th and 30th January—Second Reading of the Town and Country Planning Bill, and Committee stage of the necessary Money Resolutions.

Friday, 31st January—Committee and remaining stages of the Malta (Reconstruction) Bill; and consideration of Motions relating to Double Taxation Relief (South Africa).

Mr. Churchill

May I be permitted to say, in respect of the Motion on Monday, which is to be proposed by His Majesty's Government for a humble Address to His Majesty on the occasion of the Royal visit to the Union of South Africa, that I should be very ready, in the name of the Opposition, to second that Motion, if that is convenient for the public Business.

On the remaining Business announced, I would ask, Are these not very early days in which to take the Second Reading of the Town and Country Planning Bill? The Bill was only circulated during the Recess, and it raises a great many far-reaching and difficult matters, stretching back into the radicalism of the past and forward into the jungle of the future. I ask then. Are these not very early days in which to take this Measure; and is it intended to keep it on the Floor of the House—because that makes a difference—or is it to be sent up to a Standing Committee, where only a handful of hon. Members will have a chance of expressing their opinions upon it?

Mr. Greenwood

I should have thought that this problem had been before hon. Members of this House since before the last General Election. In the days when he was Prime Minister in a National Government, the right hon. Gentleman set up a Committee, and the Uthwatt Report has been known for a considerable time to hon. Members of this House. Proposals were made on it by the late Government. It is true, and I admit it, that this is one occasion on which we did fall down on the promise of legislation. We said that we would pass that Bill last Session. We have not done so. Everybody has been aware for a long time—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I am trying to answer the right hon. Gentleman's point about the shortage of time. I would submit to the House that active Members of it have had ample time in which to consider the Bill. We must take the Second Reading of it next week. On the question which the right hon. Gentleman quite properly raises about a Standing Committee, if he likes to ask that question next week, I will be prepared to give him an answer; but, until we have the Second Reading of the Bill, I think that it is a little early to discuss how it is to be disposed of in its subsequent stages.

Mr. Churchill

The Bill was only circulated in January. It affects an enormous number of bodies in the country who ought to have an opportunity of reading and studying it and expressing their opinions on it. It is a Bill which is not necessarily or wholly a matter of party; there are many things in it on which there would be grounds of agreement between both sides of the House. Part of the Parliamentary process is that public bodies in the country—elements of opinion in the country—should have a reasonable time—a few weeks—in which to digest and comprehend the legislation which is to be proposed in order that they may talk to their representatives about it. That process is designed to tend towards the efficient despatch of public Business, and to help the work of the House of Commons as a great machine for achieving progress without disaster.

Mr. Greenwood

I should be the last to try to force on the House consideration of a Bill unless hon. Members had had adequate time in which to consider it. But in the days of leisure, which so many hon. Members have been enjoying during the Recess, there really should have been ample time for that. By the time that we discuss this Bill in the House, it will have been in the hands of the public for rather over three weeks, and I should have thought that that was a reasonable time. The problem is not a new one; it is a very ancient problem. We have really done the reasonable thing. I did my best to get the early publication of this Bill so that there should be ample time for discussion. I think that from 1st January to the middle of next week ought to give adequate time for hon. Members of this House to consult with the people interested in it.

Lieut.-Commander Gurney Braithwaite

Would the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that it is not only hon. Members of this House who have to give the Bill careful study? It has a severe impact on local authorities, who also take a keen interest in these matters, and, in many cases, they have not yet had time for their appropriate committees to consider this Measure in detail.

Mr. Greenwood

If the hon. and gallant Gentleman had listened to my last reply, he would appreciate that I referred to Members and others who were interested in the Bill. I still assert that this is not a new problem. [HON. MEMBERS: "It is a new Bill."] The foundations of this Bill are to be found in the Reports of the Uthwatt Committee, which were published well before the end of the second world war. I should have thought that three weeks was a reasonable time. It is not the case that in the interval there has been no opportunity for discussion with local authorities or that the various organisations concerned have not been consulted. I can only suggest that this is really an example of delaying tactics.

Mr. Churchill

The question of the use made of the Parliamentary time available is quite different from that of giving people in the country an opportunity to advise their representatives what they feel about the legislation to be presented. I am surprised the right hon. Gentleman does not appreciate the distinction.

Mr. Henderson Stewart

May I put two considerations to the right hon. Gentleman? First, is not this the first time that these many ideas and proposals have been put into the form of a Bill? Secondly, is not the Bill itself generally regarded as the most highly technical Measure which this Parliament has seen; and, thirdly, will the right hon. Gentleman remember that in these same weeks that he has mentioned we have had three other Bills of major importance, on agriculture, transport and electricity, which we have been obliged to consider and which are not unconnected with this one? Is it not reasonable, therefore, in all those circumstances to ask for sufficient time to enable us to understand what the Government are asking us to agree to?

Mr. Greenwood

It is not reasonable to impede the progress of this Government, because time is the essence of the promises we have made.

Mr. Churchill

Does not the right hon. Gentleman again show himself incapable of appreciating the simple point which I have put? By the word "time" is meant the use of Parliamentary time. It does not follow' that by putting off this Bill for another fortnight to give more opportunities for it to be understood any more consumption of Parliamentary time would occur. Would not the right hon. Gentleman endeavour to comprehend that simple proposition?

Mr. Greenwood

Of course I understand it. The right hon. Gentleman is really not paying me proper regard. I do understand some of these problems. This Bill is part of our programme for this Session. The Bill, as amended by the House, is going to be put on the Statute Book this Session. There cannot be any quarrel about that. We have a little more regard for another place than have hon. Members opposite, and the Bill has to go through its stages in another place as well. Unless we can get the Second Reading early we may have to prolong the Session, which would be very unfortunate. Hon. Members who are full of zeal now would not mind, but at the end of July they will mind very much if the Session is prolonged. I think quite enough time has been given for discussion of this problem in the country. We really must insist on taking the Second Reading next week on the two days mentioned, which I think, provide ample opportunity for discussion of the principles, and other matters can be discussed later.

Mr. Churchill

May I be permitted to deprecate these attempts by the acting Leader of the House to provoke another place into undue discussion of this problem? May I ask him to consider whether something else could not be put down on this coming Wednesday, and this Measure moved forward a fortnight? It would not affect the amount of time available in the House. Could not that be done?

Mr. Greenwood

I have tried to answer this question, and I do not propose to prolong the discussion. In our wisdom, we have decided that this Bill should be taken next week, and next week it will be taken. I see little point in prolonging the discussion.

Mr. Molson

In view of the following facts, that the right hon. Gentleman the acting Leader of the House is incorrect in saying that this Bill was published on 1st January—

Mr. Greenwood

7th January.

Mr. Molson

—it was, in fact, published on 17th January—that this Bill does not only deal with the Uthwatt Report but attempts to repeal the existing town and country planning legislation passed in 1932 and replaces an entirely new code, and that this is a new solution to the problem of compensation and betterment, will the right hon. Gentleman not really give adequate time for the country and the House to consider this very long and complicated Bill?

Mr. Mathers

Is not one important way of expediting the discussion and understanding of this Bill in the country, to have a Second Reading Debate?

Mr. Orr-Ewing

May I give one example? This Bill affects non-county boroughs, and the position of non-county borough vis-à-vis the county council. There has been no possible opportunity for the Association of Non-County Boroughs and for the county councils to get together and consider what their attitude to the proposals is to be.

Mr. Gallacher

May I raise an important matter? Is the acting Leader of the House aware that in Scotland there is a ferment about the neglect of Scottish Business; and would he agree to appoint a committee of Scottish Members to make proposals for expediting such Business?

Mr. Churchill

I will give way if the acting Leader of the House wishes to answer the leader of the Communist Party.

Mr. Gallacher

May I have an answer to the question as to whether anything is going to be done to obtain full expedition and more attention to Scottish Business?

Mr. Speaker

No one can compel a Minister to answer. It is the Minister's own choice.

Mr. Churchill

I would like to ask whether the acting Leader of the House would, perhaps, put down Scottish Business on this day, thus gratifying the leader of the other party opposite, and so that there will be a longer opportunity for considering town and country planning? However, the right hon. Gentleman is obdurate and refuses. I have to ask one or two questions about the future course of Business. What are the plans for a Debate on foreign affairs? Will the right hon. Gentleman make any statement about that?

Mr. Greenwood

I assure the Leader of the Opposition that the Foreign Secretary is very anxious to meet the House on this issue. He is very much preoccupied at the moment, as I think most hon. Members will understand. It is our intention to arrange a Debate, on which we have given a pledge, as early as it can be conveniently arranged. It cannot be arranged next week, but it will be as early as possible after that. If the right hon. Gentleman wishes to consult me in the interval, I should be very glad to tell him how early we can arrange it, but certainly we shall not be late.

Mr. Churchill

We were not intending to press for any particularly early date for a Debate on foreign affairs in which, for the moment, there is a slight apparent lull, and as to which a broad measure of agreement exists between the- Government and the Opposition on many points. We must have an opportunity in the near future of discussing Palestine, but not until the conference is over. I submit that that opportunity should be granted to us. For 18 months there has been no decision and no policy. I do not know how many scores of millions of pounds a year we are spending in that country, or how many scores of thousands of men we are keeping away from their homes and their work here where they are needed-There ought to be some Debate on this subject, and some policy ought to be before us as soon as the present conference is concluded. Could we have an undertaking about that? I press that in front of a general Debate on the foreign affairs situation, although, of course, any statement which the Foreign Secretary wishes to make to us would, naturally, be received by us with the greatest attention. There is also the question of con- ditions in Germany, which is a most formidable issue, and at some time we must certainly have an opportunity for a day's Debate upon that. I am pressing those questions rather more than the general problem of foreign affairs, upon which, as I say, there is a considerable measure of agreement between the Front Benches.

Mr. Scollan

What about the Vote of Censure?

Mr. Churchill

I was just coming to that. I do not want to overburden the right hon. Gentleman the acting Leader of the House with too many questions at one moment. Perhaps he will answer what I have just asked; then I will raise the further point.

Mr. Greenwood

On the question of Palestine, I think the right hon. Gentleman agrees that, in view of the conversations which may be starting very shortiv, it would be most injudicious of this House to have a discussion. But once the conversations are concluded, then, certainly, I think it is perfectly well understood that we really must deal with the question of Palestine. What I said about foreign affairs still stands. We will not shirk a broad discussion on foreign affairs. After discussions through the usual channels, no doubt we can agree about a date. On the question of the situation in Germany, if that matter could be pursued through the usual channels we shall be as helpful as we can; and if there is a strong determination on the part of hon. Members on all sides of the House to have it, subject to other Parliamentary considerations I should certainly not stand in the way.

Mr. Churchill

Adverting to the proposition which I was asked to mention by an hon. Member on the benches opposite, the Vote of Censure, timing must always be considered as well as urgency. I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman when the Government consider we can have the three days' Debate promised on the economic and financial state of the nation. If he would state what his ideas are about that, it might be possible to combine the Vote of Censure and that Debate by means of a reasoned Amendment, and thus save the Government time for other Business.

Mr. Scollan

On a point of Order. Would it be in Order for hon. Members on these benches to ask the Leader of the Opposition a question? [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] I want to know where he is searching for ammunition for his Vote of Censure.

Mr. Speaker

Hon. Members cannot ask questions of those who are not responsible for the Government.

Mr. Greenwood

. I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his offer to co-operate in saving Government time. So far as. I am concerned, if the right hon. Gentleman—and this is within his own hands—wishes to move a Vote of Censure and couple it with the economic situation of the country I should be very delighted. I would say, however, that there is no pledge about a three day Debate, though we can argue that through the usual channels. However, it is our intention—

Mr. Churchill

It was promised.

Mr. Greenwood

We never made any promise about it. I think' three days were asked for, but one does not always necessarily get what is asked for. I am always willing to save two or three days; that is to the good. I think that within the next month or so—certainly before the end of next month—we are prepared to deal with the economic situation of the country. [Interruption.] I cannot deal with you here. That is a challenge to you. You can deal with it then.

Earl Winterton

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Greenwood

It is our intention within the next month or so to provide an opportunity for a Debate on the economic position of the country, and if the right hon. Gentleman cares to couple that with a Vote of Censure it is within his discretion, and we shall be happy to accept it.

Mr. Churchill

Frankly, I seek to facilitate the course of Business in the House, in the interests of the House having the power to discuss all the things it wants to discuss. I have always favoured—no doubt the right hon. Gentleman will bear' me out—the idea of using Supply Days for the purpose of discussing topics which the House wants to discuss. In the same way, undoubtedly if a full opportunity is given for discussing the economic and financial state of the nation before the end of February, by means of a reasoned Amendment we should be able to raise the general issue with the Government. If that could be discussed by the two sides of the House through the usual channels, it would be very satisfactory. I am bound to say, in' view of the considerable and immense implications of the subject, three days seem to me to be very necessary, and we are not inclined to give up the right of putting down a Vote of Censure unless the Debate is to be absolutely full.

Mr. Bowles

On a point of Order, in view of this half hour's Debate every Thursday, are you satisfied, Mr. Speaker, that the usual channels work at all? The usual channels are referred to in almost every question and answer on these occasions, and it does seem, to some of us at any rate, that the usual channels are not being used, and the House of Commons wastes at least half an hour every Thursday.

Mr. Speaker

That is a matter of opinion and not a point of Order.

Sir Robert Young

I did inform the Leader of the House that I wanted to ask the following question. I regret that he is not here, but I will ask the acting Leader of the House whether the Government have considered the last Report of the Select Committee on Procedure; and, if so, whether it is their intention to do anything in relation to the recommendations that were submitted in that Report?

Mr. Greenwood

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this question. The other day there was a Question on the Order Paper, on the issue of the recommendations of the Select Committee, but the hon. Member who put it down was not present. I think I am right in saying the last Report of this Committee was issued about two and a half months ago. We have not had time to consider it yet. It is our intention to do so at an early date, and once we have—[Interruption.] Hon. Members opposite chide us for moving too quickly, and then chide us for moving too slowly.

Mr. Hogg

Both are true.

Mr. Greenwood

I would say that, as soon as we have considered the Report, we shall take the earliest opportunity- of making a statement to the House.