HC Deb 30 March 1950 vol 473 cc566-8
Mr. Churchill (by Private Notice)

asked the Prime Minister whether he has any statement to make upon the Parliamentary occurrence last night.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Attlee)

It was quite obvious that in the conditions obtaining in the present House of Commons, there always was the possibility of the Government being defeated on a particular Division. The Government are in the position of a Government that has to be constantly on the watch all the time. Its Members have to be there. On the other hand, the position of the Opposition is that at any time they can direct an attack. Last night there was a Debate on the Adjournment. I think the Adjournment was taken in order to give the greatest scope to the Opposition for their speeches rather than taking the Debate on the specific matter of the Consolidated Fund. Towards the end of that Debate it was intimated that there was to be a Division.

I understand that everything had been admirably arranged, as one would expect from an experienced strategist like the right hon. Member for Woodford (Mr. Churchill). The troops were kept more or less in ambush. There was no great strength in the front line, but, at any rate, transport had been provided, and at about 9.30 there was a great accession of motor transport into Palace Yard. I quite agree that the Government forces ought to have been in full strength—I regret that they were not—and the right hon. Gentleman, therefore, was able to score a success.

This was, I thought, very reminiscent of past tactics. I must say I found a certain incompatibility in that action with an extremely statesmanlike speech which was made by the right hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove (Lieut.-Colonel Elliot) a few days ago, and indeed with the general tone which was taken by the right hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington (Mr. Eden) in what I thought was a very admirable speech.

We now have to consider the consequences of that action. I have refreshed my mind by referring to a Debate which will be remembered, I expect, by the noble Lord who is the Father of the House, and by the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition. That was the occasion of the defeat of Mr. Balfour's Government in July, 1905.

Earl Winterton (Horsham)

I was still at school.

The Prime Minister

The noble Lord is losing his memory. He was a contemporary of mine at Oxford in those days. Whether or not he behaved as a schoolboy is another matter. In fact, if I am not wrong, he was returned to this House in 1904, and this event occurred in 1905. In any event, I am quite right about the right hon. Member for Woodford because he, having recently left the Conservative Party and joined the Liberal Party, took a very prominent part in rubbing it in on his late leader, Mr. Balfour.

I considered it, however, not so much from the point of view of personalities but from the point of view of constitutional doctrine which was debated for some time. As far as I could gather the upshot of the whole matter was that action on these Debates was determined by time, by circumstances and by the subject of the Debates. In the case of 1905 there was a Government with a nominally large majority that had lost a great number of by-elections, that had lost very prominent and promising Members like the right hon. Member for Woodford, and was tottering to its fall.

On this occasion we have a Government that has been recently returned with a small majority at a General Election, and as I understand the general view was that this Government, having undertaken the burden of governing with a small majority, should carry on, it is a matter for the Opposition to choose on what points they should challenge them. Last night was obviously not a major occasion. It was a vote on an Adjournment, and in those conditions certainly I do not intend to regard that as a Vote of Censure on the Government. On any occasion if that should be done we should be prepared to meet it, but as conditions are the Government propose to carry on.

Mr. Churchill

May I express to the Prime Minister our thanks for the very full and careful statement that he has made and for his lengthy, though not apparently particularly accurate, researches into the precedents of 45 years ago. We express our obligation to him for having taken so much trouble on a matter raised by the Opposition, and I should like also to congratulate him upon the great joy and relief which his remarks have given to the party behind him.