§ Mr. ChurchillBefore I ask the Leader of the House about the Business for next week, there is a question which I wish to- ask about the Business for the remainder of this week. In view of the grave outrages which have occurred recently in Palestine, will the Government make arrangements for a Debate? On such an urgent matter as that of public order, and while the Conference in London is in session, we are not suggesting that general questions of policy should play any part, other than that of a background to the discussion. They will come later. But what about the urgent question of public order in Palestine?
§ The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. Arthur Greenwood)We are quite prepared, in response to the suggestion which has been made, to make provision for a discussion tomorrow afternoon on the outrages which have occurred recently in Palestine. We propose that, after we have disposed of the remaining stages of the Malta (Reconstruction) Bill and two other Orders, which should, not take up much time, the Adjournment of the House should be moved so that this matter may be raised.
§ Mr. ChurchillThank you. Now, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has any statement to make about the Business for next week?
§ Mr. GreenwoodThe Business for next week will be as follows:
Monday and Tuesday, 3rd and 4th February—Second Reading of the Electricity Bill and Committee stage of the necesary Money Resolution.
Wednesday, 5th February—A Debate on the. conditions in Germany will take place on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Thursday, 6th February—A Debate on the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations will take place on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House.
1119 Friday, 7th February—Second Reading of the Appellate Jurisdiction Bill and Committee stage of the necessary Money Resolution; Second Reading of the Births and Deaths Registration Bill and of the County Councils Association Expenses (Amendment) Bill.
§ Mr. ChurchillI have nothing to say about the proposals of the Government for Tuesday, and we cordially welcome their decision to assign Wednesday to a discussion on the conditions in Germany, which raises issues not at all of a party character, but of very deep concern in many quarters. What is this Debate on the international aspect of the Food and Agriculture Organisation? We have not asked for any Debate on that subject. What is to be the character of the Debate? For instance, are we to be free to discuss the steadily deteriorating food position in this country, or are we to be limited in the Debate strictly to the international aspect, that is to say, to discussion of the question of the food which everybody eats except ourselves? What is the position?
§ Mr. GreenwoodIt is perfectly true that the right hon. Gentleman has not asked for this Debate, but we can conduct the affairs of this House without relying on his requests; and I should have thought. Mr. Speaker, in view of the widespread interest that there has been for some time in the activities of this very important world organisation, that it would be most appropriate to give a day to this subject, which is not, of course—as the right hon. Gentleman said about conditions in Germany—necessarily a party issue. We have never shirked discussion, but it is not suggested that on this occasion we should deal with the food position on the home front, but only with the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations.
§ Mr. ChurchillI presume that this Debate is to take place on the Motion for the Adjournment. In that case, the Govern-men is not master of the course which the Debate takes. We can deal with any matter on the Adjournment. I am asking whether it is not the case that a Debate on the international aspect of food supply, however interesting and important, cannot be effectively conducted without reference to the condition of Great Britain, and to the sacrifices which she has already 1120 made, and to the steady deterioration of our position here at home? I should like, before I make any other remarks and ask any further questions, to know whether the Debate will be free to cover the whole range of the Food and Agriculture Organisation?
§ Mr. GreenwoodI am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for giving me this kindergarten lesson on the Business of the House. I am perfectly well aware that an Adjournment Motion Debate may roam over a very wide field—obviously so—but it has on many occasions been the practice of the House, by the good will of the House, to confine a Debate on such an occasion broadly within the limits proposed when the Business was announced. The question of how, far the Debate will run, is not one for me, but for Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. ChurchillPassing over the rather controversial remarks which the right hon. Gentleman made in the opening of his speech—leaving that entirely on one side—there is simply this question: Does he not realise that should he pursue such a tone, he will make us all the more anxious for the return of the natural Leader of the House, whose illness, I may say, we all much regret? May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the fact that this Debate will be a free Debate on the Adjournment, and that any one who catches Mr. Speaker's eye will be able to talk about what he chooses, and is not obliged to disclose his purpose beforehand—the Debate may not be rather far reaching? Further, in view of the continuing gravity of the housing problem, which far exceeds that of the genera! question of the international food supply, would it not be better to arrange a Debate on the housing problem having regard to the increasing and lamentable failure of the Minister of Health to provide the houses? [Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerI think that it would be just as well for hon. Members to hear what the right hon. Gentleman has to say.
§ Mr. ChurchillWould it not be better, in the circumstances which I have indicated, to have a Debate on the housing question, on a point such as the salary of the right hon. Gentleman the Minister, or some other special point which would 1121 raise the question precisely? I suggest that that is a much more practical issue at the moment.
§ Mr. GreenwoodI should have thought that the matter which we have suggested for discussion next Thursday was one of great interest to many people, and that the House would welcome a Debate. On the other hand, we are not indisposed to have a Debate on housing at any time within reason. I should have thought the House would have been content to do what was suggested and at a convenient date to return to the problem of the housing situation.
§ Mr. ChurchillWould the right hon. Gentleman consider how very appropriate this day would be for a discussion on housing, following as it does almost immediately after the confessions in the White Paper?
§ Mr. John PatonIn view of the fact that the Opposition seem to have no knowledge whatever of one of the most important of the United Nations organisations, which is for the protection of the future food supplies of the peoples of the world, will the right hon. Gentleman consider canalising the discussion by placing a Motion on the Order Paper?
§ Mr. PickthornIn view of what the right hon. Gentleman the acting Leader of the House has said about the capacity of His Majesty's Government to conduct affairs without relying upon the Opposition, may I ask him, if the Chief Whip and the First Lord of the Treasury will permit me, whether in that he was including affairs of international and strategic importance? Can the Government control them, without relying upon the House of Commons?
§ Mr. SpeakerMay I point out that we are not really discussing the part played by the Opposition in conducting Business, but the Business for next week?
§ Mr. ChurchillI will confine myself strictly to the point. Of course, the Government are masters of these things but there are conventions also. I am only suggesting that a Debate on Sir John Boyd Orr's Report on the International Food and Agriculture Organisation, if it did not include the British food position, would be very unreal, and we can offer no guarantee if this subject is raised, that the 1122 other side will not be raised also. I am only suggesting that it might be better to deal with the practical issues of the times. That would be a better use of our time. It is only a suggestion, but will the Government consider that?
§ Mr. GreenwoodI ought to have said that if the Debate is on the Adjournment, quite clearly it will roam more widely perhaps than we had thought, but if the home situation in relation to food is raised, as it might well be, I have no doubt Mr. Speaker will call Members of the House to speak who will deal with the home front. I hope that that situation will be accepted.
§ Mr. ChurchillCan we then have the Debate on housing? That is a very urgent matter.
§ Mr. GreenwoodI undertake to arrange a Debate on that and I think that it might well be left to discussions through the usual channels.
§ Mr. ScollanHave the Government taken into consideration an allocation of time for the much advertised Vote of Censure?
§ Mr. SpeakerWe are discussing the Business for next week.
§ Professor SavoryWhen are the Government going to give time for a discussion on the events arising out of the recent election in Poland for which His Majesty's Government are responsible under the the Yalta and Potsdam Agreements?
§ Mr. GreenwoodThere will, of course, be opportunities for that during the discussions that are to take place as soon as this can be conveniently arranged between the Opposition and the Government on the whole foreign affairs situation. I should have thought that it would not be right to detach that one problem from the much wider one.
§ Mr. ChurchillOn this question of a Debate on foreign affairs, the Opposition are not pressing for that at the moment. They think it is, for the moment, a dead topic, as it were, and we trust the Foreign Secretary will get some rest from his hard labours. We shall not press for a discussion of foreign affairs involving great issues which are alive in Europe and the world at the present time. Naturally, we shall want a discussion before the 1123 Foreign Secretary leaves for Moscow. I am only casting that out; perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will bear it in mind as a matter to be arranged through the usual channels.
§ Mr. WalkdenCan the acting Leader of the House give us a clear indication whether we shall be privileged in next week's food and agriculture Debate to discuss the operation, structure and functions of the Combined Food Board, particularly in relation to certain pacts that we have with other countries? Will that be included so that some of us can prepare evidence and information to contribute to that Debate?
§ Mr. GreenwoodI should have thought the words I used would have covered that.
§ Viscount HinchingbrookeIn view of the fact that the Rule was suspended for one hour on the first day of the Debate on the Town and Country Planning Bill, can the right hon. Gentleman arrange to have the Rule suspended for one hour on Monday when we are discussing the Electricity Bill?
§ Mr. GreenwoodWe are suspending the Rule tonight in order to take the Money Resolution on the Town and Country Planning Bill. We hope that the Debate on the Second Reading will terminate at 10 O'Clock.
§ Viscount HinchingbrookeIt was the Electricity Bill I mentioned.
§ Mr. GreenwoodAs to the first day of the Debate on the Electricity Bill we will consider that, but it can be more quickly done through the usual channels.
§ Mr. Leslie HaleWill the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind the suggestion of the junior Member for Norwich (Mr. Paton) about next Thursday's Debate; and will he also bear in mind that whatever opinions the Opposition Front Bench have of this matter, in those quarters of the House where intelligent interest is taken in world conditions, there is a wide interest taken in this question?
§ Mr. MaclayWill the acting Leader of the House when he is considering, as he must in the near future, the question of the Bills to be sent to Standing Committee, remember a matter which is of the greatest importance to every Scottish Member? The Scottish Grand Committee on the Scottish Health Bill is sitting at present. There are other Bills in Standing Committee too, and next week the Transport Bill goes to Standing Committee. We do not know what other Bills will be similarly dealt with, but Scottish Members must take an interest in Scottish Bills. That is expected of them both in Scotland and in the House, but how can they possibly give the benefit of their advice and guidance in regard to the other Bills as they affect Scotland, when they go to Standing Committee?
§ Mr. GreenwoodIt will not be necessary for them to do so on any particular Bill next week.