§ 2.43 p.m.
§ Mr. CrookshankI beg to move,
That until the Adjournment of the House for Christmas Government Business shall have precedence at every Sitting, and that no Bills other than Government Bills be introduced in anticipation of the ballot.This Motion will not come as any surprise, because my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, in his speech to the House yesterday, foreshadowed that, in the Government's view, it would be necessary to take the time of the House until Christmas, and he said that I would give notice today of the necessary Motion. This is in accordance with precedent, and there is nothing new about it, particularly at a time when a new Parliament has just come into being.It stands to reason that, first of all, if some such Motion were not passed we should revert to the Standing Orders, which, of course, devote Wednesdays and Fridays to this purpose, but in 1946 a Select Committee recommended otherwise to this House, and suggested at that time that Fridays should be devoted to Private Members' time. This was accepted by the last Government both last year and 173 the year before, when we had the restoration of Private Members' time and Fridays were used.
It is our intention, of course, not to take away any Private Members' time, but in this short period before Christmas it would obviously, in our view, be inconvenient and not so useful to Private Members themselves to take what we hope they will enjoy later in the Session. Everyone who has been in the House for any length of time knows that there is quite a bit of deciding and organising by Private Members on what Bills they wish to introduce and which of their hon. Friends they would like to support them, and so forth.
Likewise, at a time when we are having a prolonged debate on the King's Speech, when, I think I am right in saying, almost anything can be raised, there is no pressure—at least, there has not been in the past—for Private Members' Motions, whereas later on in the Session, when there is not so much opportunity for general debates, they become increasingly valuable. So we are proposing, as has been done in the past, that for this short period there will be no Private Members' time, and that it should come into effect after Christmas.
§ Mr. Geoffrey Bing (Hornchurch)The right hon. Gentleman keeps on saying "this short period." Can he give any indication when it is proposed to adjourn before Christmas, because hon. Members on both sides of the House must bear that in mind in coming to a decision?
§ Mr. CrookshankI appreciate that it would be very helpful to hon. Members to know when they can start their Christmas holidays. [Interruption.] Well, it is the same for everybody. My right hon. Friend said yesterday that he expected the House would probably rise early in December, [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] My right hon. Friend explained it all yesterday. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] It is not entirely relevant to the Motion which I am moving. What I am trying to put to hon. Members is that we intend to restore Private Members' time, and that there is no question of taking it away. I am quite sure that they realise that I am a protagonist in that battle and have been for some years. Therefore, if the House accepts the Motion, it will be necessary before the House rises for Christmas maybe, to have a detailed 174 Motion in order to lay out the mechanism of the Ballot, and so on.
§ Mr. BingIf the right hon. Gentleman could give to the House the actual time in days which we should have to sit further than the period intimated by the Prime Minister in order to have Private Members' Business restored now, it would be of great assistance to us in coming to a decision on that point.
§ Mr. Hector Hughes (Aberdeen, North)Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that it is not a short time, because the Prime Minister yesterday proposed that the House shall adjourn in December until February. That is not a short time; in fact, it will be a long time during which Private Members will be deprived of their opportunities.
§ Mr. CrookshankPerhaps the hon. and learned Gentleman was not exactly following what I was saying. I was saying that at the moment, owing to the long debate on the Address, there is opportunity for all such questions to be raised, but so far as Bills are concerned, it has always in the past been found inconvenient if hon. Members had to take snap decisions to introduce Bills and decide exactly what they wanted to do. One cannot assume that everybody has been able to be consulted. They may not have known that they were going to be re-elected. Therefore, we suggest to the House that this Motion is a desirable one, and is in the interests of Private Members themselves.
I hope the House will realise the importance of the second part of the Motion. If we have a system of Private Members' Bills, with the opportunity of the Ballot, there should be no jumping of claims by the introduction of Bills ahead of the Ballot under the Ten Minutes Rule procedure. There will be consultations, and I shall be at the disposal of anyone who wishes to consult me. We propose that, prior to the Ballot, no Bill should be introduced either under the Ten Minutes Rule or by presentation, and that we shall have no Private Members' Bills until after the Ballot has been determined. After that, we shall have them, as we had them in the last Session.
That is the purpose of this Motion, and before we part we shall have to have a more detailed Motion setting out the 175 actual time-table, but that can be—and I hope will be—subject to consultation. I shall be very happy and ready to place myself at the disposal of anyone who wishes to consult me on the subject.
I hope, therefore, that the House will think that this is a reasonable way of dealing with this matter. In fact, it is exactly the same sort of procedure as was carried out in 1950 after the General Election in that year. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] The summer Session was short and there was not time for the full amount of Private Members' time. There was a delay immediately after that election, as there is now, in order to enable Members to come to their own decisions. I hope, therefore, that this Motion, which is completely in accordance with precedent—I give the House the fullest assurance which I can give that it is our intention to give to Private Members their full dues in this connection— will be accepted by the House.
§ 2.51 p.m.
§ Mr. C. R. Attlee (Walthamstow, West)The situation which faces the House today is not entirely in accordance with precedent. As a rule, there are two reasons for this Motion. The one which has some validity is the fact that at the assembling of a new Parliament time is needed for Members to consider their Private Bills and to make all the usual arrangements for support. The other reason is, generally, that there is urgent Government business. The absence of of precedent today is that there is no urgent public business. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I am taking it from the speech of the Prime Minister. He requires three months to decide on his policy.
Obviously, the party opposite took an extremely pessimistic view of their chances at the General Election, and the result is that they have nothing ready. I suppose we shall wind up our Sittings very shortly in order to give them a chance to think what they want to do. That, of course, takes away all the reason for urgency for Government business having precedence, because there is no Government business. Therefore, although the argument put forward by the right hon. Gentleman has some validity with regard to Bills, I do not think it has much validity with regard to Motions.
176 After all, the King's Speech will be debated for the next week, and, although certain matters will be raised then, there are plenty of other matters which hon. Members might like to raise, and as the Government seem to have plenty of time at their disposal, there does not seem to be any reason why the Private Members' time should be curtailed. I should like to have an assurance that, whatever happens, we are not going to be met later on with the position where, the Government, having decided on their policy and having legislation to bring forward, subsequently curtail Private Members' time. I know that the right hon. Gentleman was always very keen on Private Members' time, but having formerly been the head poacher, he is now the head gamekeeper, and he might like to change. I really see no reason, unless we get some rather clearer statement of what is going to happen in the next few weeks, why there should be this complete curtailment.
§ 2.55 p.m.
§ Mr. James Callaghan (Cardiff, South-East)This Motion really needs looking at carefully, especially when it is moved by the Leader of the House in terms which suggests that it is in accordance with precedent and with what is usual. It so happens that it is a year ago today when we last discussed this Motion, and I hope it is not an unhappy augury for this Government. But it so happens that the official Opposition, which was then the Government, had the House divided against them on this particular Motion on that day.
§ Sir Herbert Williams (Croydon, East)Hear, hear.
§ Mr. CallaghanI hope we shall get the support of the hon. Member, because he has been a very important protagonist in this matter, and I would like to remind him, as I was going to do, of what he divided the House on last year. He did not divide it on whether we should have Private Members' time or the opportunity to put forward Private Members' Bills; he and his friends divided the House on a much narrower point. What the Government were doing in those days was restoring the facility of Private Members' Motions and Bills, and the hon. Member for Croydon, East, made a speech on that occasion, and divided the House, not on this very wide point, but on the narrow 177 point of whether we should have Ten Minutes Rule Bills.
I want to remind the Leader of the House that we are discussing this matter today as we discussed it last year, and we have exactly the same time before Christmas now as we had then. The difference between what he now proposes and what we did then as a House was that we had five Fridays set aside for Private Members, three of which were devoted to the presentation of Bills and their Second Reading discussion and two of which were devoted to Private Members' Motions. I should be very surprised if hon. Members, returning here flushed with victory from the polls, are not burning to legislate on a number of issues and have not a number of important views they want to put to the House and the country. I have a perfectly good Bill myself on oil pollution of the sea in which I am sure the Minister of Transport will be interested.
But the first point I want to make to the Leader of the House is that this does not really 'match up with what the Prime Minister promised us yesterday when he said the House would have the full and customary opportunities for discussion. These are not the full and customary opportunities for discussion which we were promised, and, if I may, I would respectfully support my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition when he says that no case has yet been made out as to what the Government wants this time for.
What is it we are going to do? What are we going to set aside? It is not legislation. The Government are not interested in legislation—they told us so—but they are interested in administration. Very well, then, this is a good opportunity for allowing Private Members to put forward their own projects and to explain their views on the situation. The Government have a thin programme; that has been admitted on both sides. They do not want a full programme.
Let us look at the situation with which we are confronted. Within the first two days of this Parliament we have three blows struck at us. The first is that we are soon to be sent away for two months the second is that when we are here we are to be asked to sit in secret; and the third that we are to have no Private Members' time before Christmas. [HON. MEMBERS: "After Christmas."] Very 178 well, then, that we shall not have any Private Members' time until just before Easter.
I want to put a particular point to the Leader of the House. He says we shall get the time after Christmas. We know that he is going to have the Steel Bill in front of him then and also a Bill, I presume, to denationalise road transport. He knows that there are a number of Departmental Bills waiting in the pigeon holes to be thrust on to expectant Ministers wishing to show how good they are. If when we meet again in the spring, the House is going to be busy with the Finance Bill immediately after Easter, are we to have sufficient time to debate Private Members' Bills, and to give them their Second Reading, Committee and Third Reading stages, or are we to find that, as usual, there will be a press of legislation between Easter and the end of the Summer Recess, whenever that may be?
I ask this because with our present capricious Prime Minister no one knows when we are to be allowed to come here. I am sorry to see he is taking this present line. I shall turn to what he had to say about this matter a year ago when we discussed it last. The House will find it interesting. On 31st October he said:
… I welcome the Socialist Party's conversion to Parliamentary government, instead of the direct action which was their mood 20 years ago, when there was a very strong feeling that Parliament was nothing but an impediment to the progress of democracy and that it would not he inside the walls of Parliament that any real advance could be made.Notice how pregnant with things to come is the next sentence:Now there is a great reconciliation, and the House of Commons is accepted as a thoroughly democratic institution—there is even an ugly rush for the House of Lords."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 31st October, 1950; Vol. 480, c. 16–17.]This is a matter between the House and the Government. I know Members of the Opposition always say that and try to tempt Government Members into the net, and I do not suppose that any of them will come this time. But the fact is that we really have not had any reason advanced by the Leader of the House why we should be deprived of what was done last year. The fact remains that the first major announcements of this Government are to deprive or to lessen the rights of Private Members to criticise in public or 179 at all. In these circumstances, I say that we have to hear much more sensible reasons from the Leader of the House before many of us do not feel that this is just another step in the process of ruling by Order instead of ruling through Parliament.
§ 3.2 p.m.
§ Sir Herbert Williams (Croydon, East)The hon. Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan), made some reference to me, which I do not mind because all advertisement is good. He is surely the last person to talk about this subject. Never in his Parliamentary life has he taken part in a debate on a Private Member's Bill.
§ Mr. CallaghanThe hon. Member is quite wrong, and I hope he will withdraw.
§ Sir H. WilliamsFor the first three years the hon. Member was in Parliament there was no Private Members' business, and thereafter he was a Minister and was debarred.
§ Mr. CallaghanThe hon. Member might really withdraw. We had debates on this subject in 1945, 1946 and 1947.
§ Sir H. WilliamsI am talking about Private Members' business; not about whether there should or should not be any Private Members' business. The hon. Member has never spoken on a Private Member's Bill. He has never spoken on a Private Member's Motion. He does not even know what they look like.
I suppose that I have taken part in more of those debates than any hon. or right hon. Member of this House. [An HON. MEMBER: "It got you nowhere."] The Government have decided, and I think on balance they are right—[Laughter.] I do not know why that should produce laughter. I think that on balance they are right, when the late Government have left things in such an unholy mess that they have to spend a little time in assessing the situation.
The Prime Minister, for that reason, is absolutely right in proposing a very light legislative programme between now and Christmas in order that he and his colleagues may have ample time to consider what has to be done in the light of the evils they have discovered since they became Ministers. Somebody mentioned casually to me about 10 days ago that this Motion was likely to come up and asked 180 me what I thought of it. Quite apart from any controversy, I thought it was legitimate, and in private conversation I said so before this Motion was on the Order Paper.
But there is one point which I wish to raise. I understand that during the Parliament that had not the advantage of having me as a Member there was a Select Committee on Procedure which came to a decision with which I do not agree. It was that Private Members' business should come up on Fridays. That is a great mistake. There is great advantage in some Private Members' business being taken in mid-week. I hope therefore that when we resume Private Members' business in February, which is the customary time—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] Yes, it is the customary time, and I have been in this place on and off since 1924. It used to be the custom to start Private Members' time on the first Tuesday in February and have it on Tuesday evening, Wednesday evening and Friday—[Interruption.] There is no political reason why I should not consult another old hand, my hon. Friend the Member for Galloway (Mr. McKie).
I hope that the Leader of the House will consider some change in the procedure that was established when, very late in the lifetime of the first Socialist Government, Private Business was first permitted. I think there is a great advantage in having possibly Wednesday evening for Private Members' Motions and Fridays for Private Members' Bills. That was the practice for many years, and it worked exceedingly well.
I hope that there will be consultation, not merely through the usual channels, because they are the two conspirators, but through other channels of consultation available, whatever the methods, between the Private Members concerned. I believe that the Labour Party have a meeting once a week—the Conservative Party have their meeting, and no doubt the Liberal Party have theirs; but there should be consultation with the rank and file. This is not a matter for the Front Bench on either side. I think that there is an overwhelming case, which I will not develop because time is going, and no doubt others who are less experienced will want to speak. I hope there will be consultation with regard to the suggestion I make in great seriousness, that one 181 Wednesday a week during the prescribed period should be devoted to Private Members' Motions and Fridays devoted to Private Members' Bills.
§ 3.8 p.m.
§ Mr. Sydney Silverman (Nelson and Colne)Like the Leader of the House, I, too, was a member of the Select Committee on Procedure which was appointed in the Parliament of 1945 and made a Report—and as far as I remember it was a unanimous Report—about Private Members' time. One thing we certainly all agreed about was that Private Members' legislative time was more important than Private Members' time devoted to Motions.
Another thing we agreed about was that Private Members' time devoted to legislation failed in its purpose unless there was sufficient time. provided the House thought fit, to give a Second Reading to a Bill and to carry it through its Committee, Report and Third Reading stages. For that reason we proposed, among other alterations, an alteration which limited the period during which Motions for the Second Reading of Private Members' Bills should be entertained and that the second part of any Session should be devoted, so far as Private Members' time was concerned, to further stages of such Bills as had received a Second Reading and had gone through the Committee stage.
I should like the House, in the light of those facts, to examine the Motion which the Leader of the House has moved because it means that for this Session there can be no Private Members' time at all so far as effective legislation is concerned. If I understand the Motion correctly, it is that there shall be no Bills introduced in anticipation of the Ballot, no Bills printed in anticipation of the Ballot, and no ballot until after the House resumes its sittings after the Christmas Adjournment, which the Prime Minister told us yesterday was not to be until February.
So that the first thing we shall be able to do with Private Members' time in this Parliament will be, to have a Ballot at the beginning of February—say in the first week in February; we shall then have a Ballot for a Bill to be introduced a fortnight after that. We are thus virtually at the end of February before the first Private Members' Bill can be moved. Four or five weeks after that there will be no more days for the introduction of 182 Motions for the Second Reading of Private Members' Bills. So that what the right hon. Gentleman is proposing is that we shall virtually abandon for this Session the right of Private Members to enact legislation at all.
There may be an element of exaggeration in what I have said, but it is a slight element and not sufficient to invalidate the argument. It may be that there will be time for one or two, but certainly no more time than that. We are virtually being asked to abandon the Private Members' right to legislate. For what reason are we being asked to do this? During the war the House unanimously agreed that it would be frivolous to devote the time of the House to Private Members' legislation then. We are not at war yet. Provided the Prime Minister can persuade the wild men behind him to pay some heed to the concluding sentences of his speech yesterday, it may be that there will not be one.
The other reason that was advanced, and most hotly contested by no one more eloquently than the Leader of the House, was the argument advanced by my hon. Friends in the autumn of 1945. Their argument was that there were so many urgent things about which they as a Government felt obliged to call upon the House to pass legislation, that it would be frivolous to leave any part of the time to he used casually and by lot by Private Members for legislation. I do not know whether or not that was a good reason. Unlike the hon. Member for Croydon, East (Sir H. Williams), I happen to be one of those who stood up for the rights of Private Members against my own Government at the time.
§ Sir H. WilliamsI did.
§ Mr. SilvermanNo, what the hon. Gentleman did was to stand up for the rights of Private Members against the encroachment of a Government of which he was not a supporter. I stood up for the rights of Private Members against the encroachment of the Government of which I was a supporter. If the right hon. Gentleman who now leads the House thought that it was wrong for the Government of those days to deprive Private Members of their rights to initiate legislation merely because they had a full legislative programme of their own, then 183 it must be wholly ludicrous and quite fantastic for him to argue today that Private Members should be deprived of their right to initiate legislation when the Prime Minister has declared that for the period for which this Motion is to endure the Government have no legislation at all.
This proposal must be seen in conjunction with the Prime Minister's announcement that he is going to send us all home for two-and-a-half months at the beginning of December, and though we cannot debate that part of it, I submit that these two things seen together really amount to a contempt of Parliamenary Government—a contempt with which the Prime Minister's speech yesterday was redolent throughout. The Prime Minister has never, in the view of many of us, been a democrat, but until yesterday we had always regarded him as a good House of Commons man, which is not quite the same thing.
§ Mr. R. Jennings (Sheffield, Hallam)He saved your skin.
§ Mr. SilvermanThe effect of these two proposals is to diminish the importance and the effectiveness of Parliament at a juncture in our affairs when the respect in which Parliament is held in this country and abroad is a more important question than ever it has been in history. It had been a complaint in the House of Commons for a long time that the House of Commons and Parliament itself were becoming more and more a kind of workshop or factory for producing Acts of Parliament, and less and less a forum for the examination of public controversies and the airing of public grievances.
The situation in which the House of Commons finds itself today by reason of the number of elections, by reason of the almost equal division of parties and by reason of the Government's lack of desire to introduce any legislation, at any rate very quickly, is to give the House of Commons for the first time for many years an opportunity to resume its functions as the great public forum in which the great questions of the day can be freely debated, more freely debated than it is possible to debate them when the debate is allied closely to a particular proposal or a particular Bill which is before us.
One would have thought that in these days when we are trying to defend Par 184 liamentary democracy against so many enemies, we would have taken every opportunity that presented itself of defending those institutions by extending their influence and adding a new importance to their functions and their facilities. Instead of that, we find the Prime Minister yesterday and the Leader of the House today conspiring to diminish and belittle the House of Commons at a time when its importance ought to be enhanced and glorified. Whatever my hon. Friends may think it advisable to do, I for one shall oppose this Motion.
§ Mr. SpeakerWhatever may be the merits of this Motion which is before the House, the point is a comparatively narrow one. We have ahead of us a very important debate, and many hon. Members on both sides of the House have signified their desire to speak in it. I would ask the House to come to a decision on this question.
§ Mr. CrookshankPerhaps I may, with the leave of the House, answer one or two points. This is Private Members' time that we are talking about in general. It is merely proposed by this Motion to postpone its use until later in the Session. That is the point. There is no suggestion of depriving hon. Members of Private Members' time at all, and there is certainly no conspiracy against Parliament, as the hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. S. Silverman) suggested.
I was, however, struck by one of the hon. Member's remarks when he said that if we did not have the Ballot until we met after Christmas, there might be a delay for hon. Members wishing to bring in their Bills. I shall be quite prepared to consider a method by which we could have the Ballot before we broke up, if that were agreed, so that the very first Friday we met after we resumed would be available for immediate business without the delays inherent in the Ballot.
For the rest, as I said in my opening remarks, I am entirely at the disposal of hon. Members, whether in groups, committees, through the usual channels or in any other way, who would like to make representations about how we should settle this business in detail later on.
§ Question put.
§ The House divided: Ayes, 305; Noes, 227.
189Division No. 2. | AYES | [3.25 p.m. |
Aitken, W. T. | Eccles, Rt. Hon. D. M. | Lennox-Boyd, A. T |
Allan, R. A. (Paddington, S.) | Elliot, Rt. Hon. W E. | Lindsay, Martin |
Alport, C. J. M. | Erroll, F. J. | Linstead, H. N. |
Amery, Julian (Preston, N.) | Fell, A. | Llewellyn, D T. |
Amory, Heathcoat (Tiverton) | Finlay, G. B. | Lloyd, Rt. Hon. G. (King's Norton) |
Anstruther-Gray, Major W. J. | Fisher, Nigel | Lloyd, Maj. Guy (Renfrew, E.) |
Arbuthnot, John | Fletcher, Walter (Bury) | Lockwood, Lt.-Col. J. C. |
Assheton, Rt. Hon. R. (Blackburn, W.) | Fletcher-Cooke, C. | Longden, Gilbert (Herts, S.W.) |
Astor, Hon. J. J. (Plymouth, Sutton) | Fort, R. | Low, A. R. W. |
Astor, Hon. W. W. (Bucks, Wycombe) | Foster, John | Lucas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.) |
Baker, P. A. D. | Fraser, Hon. Hugh (Stone) | Lucas, P. B. (Brentford) |
Baldock, Lt.-Cmdr. J. M | Fraser, Sir Ian (Morecambe & Lonsdale) | Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh |
Baldwin, A. E. | Fyfe, Rt. Hon. Sir David Maxwell | Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. O. |
Banks, Col. C. | Gage, C. H. | McAdden, S. J. |
Barber, A. P. L. | Galbraith, Cmdr. T. D. (Pollok) | McCallum, Major D. |
Barlow, Sir John | Galbraith, T. G. D. (Hillhead) | McCorquodale, Rt. Hon. M. S. |
Baxter, A. B. | Gammans, L. D. | Macdonald, Sir Peter (I. of Wight) |
Beamish, Maj. Tufton | Garner-Evans, E. H. (Denbigh) | McKibbin, A. J. |
Bell, P. I. (Bolton, E.) | George, Rt. Hon. Maj. G. Lloyd | McKie, J. H. (Galloway) |
Bell, R. M. (Bucks, S.) | Glyn, Sir Ralph | Maclay, Hon. John |
Bennett, F. M. (Reading, N.) | Godber, J. B. | Maclean, Fitzroy |
Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gosport) | Gomme-Duncan, Col. A. | MacLeod, Iain (Enfield, W.) |
Bennett, William (Woodside) | Gough, C. F. H. | MacLeod, John (Ross and Cromarty) |
Bevins, J. R. (Toxteth) | Gower, H. R. | Macmillan, Rt. Hon. Harold (Bromley) |
Birch. Nigel | Graham, Sir Fergus | Macpherson, Maj. Niall (Dumfries) |
Bishop, F. P. | Gridley, Sir Arnold | Maitland, Cmdr. J. F. W. (Horncastle) |
Black, C. W. | Grimston, Hon. John (St. Albans) | Maitland, P. (Lanark) |
Boothby, R. J. G | Grimston, Robert (Westbury) | Manningham-Buller, R. E. |
Bossom, A. C. | Harden, J. R. E. | Markham, Major S. F. |
Boyd Carpenter, J. A | Hare, Hon. J. H. | Marlowe, A. A. H. |
Boyle, Sir Edward | Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N.) | Marshall, Douglas (Bodmin) |
Braine, B. R. | Harris, Reader (Heston) | Marshall, Sidney (Sutton) |
Braithwaite, Sir Albert (Harrow, W.) | Harrison, Lt.-Col. J. H. (Eye) | Maude, Angus |
Braithwaita, Lt.-Cdr. G. (Bristol, N.W.) | Harvey, Air Cdre. A. V. (Macclesfield) | Maudling, R. |
Bromley-Davenport, Lt,-Col. W. H. | Harvey, Ian (Harrow, E.) | Maydon, Lt.-Cmdr. S. L. C |
Brooke, Henry (Hampstead) | Harvie-Watt, Sir George | Medlicott, Brig. F. |
Brooman-White, R. C. | Hay, John | Mellor, Sir John |
Browne, Jack (Govan) | Head, A. H. | Molson, A. H. E. |
Buchan Hepburn, P. G. T. | Heath, Edward | Moore, Lt.-Col. Sir Thomas |
Bullard, D. G. | Henderson, John (Cathcart) | Morrison, John (Salisbury) |
Bullock, Capt. M. | Hicks-Beach, Maj. W. W | Mott-Radclyffe, C. E. |
Bullus, Wing Commander E. E. | Higgs, J. M. C. | Nabarro, G. D. N. |
Burden, F. F. A. | Hill, Dr. Charles (Luton) | Nicholls, Harmar |
Butler, Rt. Hn. R. A. (Saffron Walden) | Hill, Mrs. E. (Wythenshawe) | Nicholson, G. |
Carr, Robert (Mitcham) | Hinchingbrooke, Viscount | Nield, Basil (Chester) |
Carson, Hon. E. | Hirst, Geoffrey | Noble, Cmdr. A. H. P. |
Cary, Sir R. | Holland-Martin, C. J. | Nugent, G. R. H. |
Channon, H. | Hollis, M. C. | Nutting, Anthony |
Churchill, Rt. Hon. W. S. | Holmes, Sir Stanley (Harwich) | Oakshott, H. D |
Clarke, Col. Ralph (East Grinstead) | Hope, Lord John | Odey, G. W. |
Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmouth, W.) | Hopkinson, Henry | O'Neill. Rt. Hon Sir H. (Antrim, N.) |
Clyde, J. L. | Hornsby-Smith, Miss M. P. | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. W. D. |
Cole, N. J. | Horobin, I. M. | Orr, Capt L. P. S. |
Colegate, W. A. | Howard, Gerald (Cambridgeshire) | Orr-Ewing, Charles Ian (Hendon, N.) |
Conant, Maj. R. J. E. | Howard, Greville (St. lves) | Orr-Ewing, Ian L. (Weston-super-Mare) |
Cooper, Sqn. Ldr. Albert | Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.) | Osborne, C. |
Cooper-Key, E. M. | Hudson, Rt. Hon. Robert (Southport) | Partridge, E. |
Craddock, Beresford (Spelthorne) | Hudson, W. R. A. (Hull, N.) | Peake, Rt. Hon. O |
Cranborne, Viscount | Hulbert, Wing Cmdr. N. J. | Perkins, W R. D |
Crookshank, Rt. Hon. H. F. C. | Hurd, A. R. | Peto, Brig. C. H. M |
Crosthwaite Eyre, Col. O. E. | Hutchinson, Geoffrey, (Ilford, N.) | Peyton, J. W. W. |
Crouch, R. F. | Hutchison, Lt.-Com. Clark (E'b'rgh W.) | Pickthorn, K. W. M. |
Crowder, Capt. John (Finchley) | Hyde, Lt.-Col. H. M. | Pilkington, Capt. R. A. |
Crowder, Petre (Ruislip—Northwood) | Hylton-Foster, H. B. H. | Pitman, I. J. |
Cuthbert, W. N. | Jenkins, R. C. D. (Dulwich) | Powell, J. Enoch |
Darling, Sir William (Edinburgh, S) | Jennings, R. | Price, Henry (Lewisham, W.) |
Davidson, Viscountess | Johnson, E. S. T. (Blackley) | Prior-Palmer, Brig. O. L. |
Davies, Rt. Hon. Clement (Montgomery) | Johnson, Howard (Kemptown) | Profumo, J. D. |
De la Bère, R. | Jones, A. (Hall Green) | Raikes, H. V. |
Deedes, W. F. | Joynson-Hicks, Hon. L. W | Rayner, Brig. R |
Digby, S. Wingfield | Kaberry, D, | Redmayne, M. |
Dodds-Parker, A. D. | Keeling, E. H. | Remnant, Hon. P. |
Donaldson, Cmdr. C. D. M'A. | Kerr, H. W. (Cambridge) | Renton, D. L. M. |
Donner P. W. | Lambert, Hon. G. | Roberts, Maj. Peter (Heeley) |
Doughty, C. J. A. | Lambton, Viscount | Robertson, Sir David |
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord Malcolm | Lancaster, Col. C. G | Robinson, Roland (Blackpool, S.) |
Drayson, G. B. | Langford-Holt, J. A. | Robson-Brown, W. |
Drewe C | Law, Rt. Hon. R. K. | Rodgers, John (Sevenoaks) |
Dugdale, Maj. Sir Thomas (Richmond) | Leather, E. H. C | Roper, Sir Harold |
Duncan, Capt. J. A. L | Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H. | Ropner, Col. L. |
Duthie, W. S. | Legh, P. R. (Petersfield) | Russell, R. S. |
Ryder, Capt. R. E. D. | Storey, S. | Vosper, D. F. |
Salter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur | Strauss, Henry (Norwich. S.) | Wakefield, Edward (Derbyshire, W.) |
Sandys, Rt- Hon. D. | Stuart, Rt. Hon. James (Moray) | Wakefield, Sir Wavell (Marylebone) |
Savory, Prof. D. L. | Studholme, H. G. | Ward, Hon. George (Worcester) |
Schofield, Lt.-Col. W. | Summers, G. S. | Ward, Miss I. (Tynemouth) |
Scott-Miller, Cmdr. R. | Sutcliffe, H. | Waterhouse, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. |
Shepherd, William | Taylor, Charles (Eastborune) | Watkinson, H. A. |
Smiles, Lt.-Col. Sir Walter | Taylor, William (Bradford, N.) | Webbe, Sir H. (London & Westminster) |
Smithers, Peter (Winchester) | Teeling, W. | Wellwood, W. |
Smithers, Sir Waldron (Orpington) | Thomas, J. P. L. (Hereford) | White, Baker (Canterbury) |
Smyth, Brig. J. G. (Norwood) | Thomas, P. J. M. (Conway) | Williams, Charles (Torquay) |
Snadden, W. McN. | Thompson, Kenneth Pugh (Walton) | Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge) |
Soames, Capt. C. | Thompson, Lt.-Cdr. R. (Croydon, W.) | Williams, Sir Herbert (Croydon, E.) |
Spearman, A. C. M. | Thorneycroft, Rt. Hon. Peter (Monm'th) | Williams, R. Dudley (Exeter) |
Speir, R. M. | Thornton-Kemsley, Col. C N. | Wills, G. |
Spence, H. R (Aberdeenshire, W.) | Tilney, John | Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro) |
Spens, Sir Patrick (Kensington, S.) | Touche, G. C. | Wood, Hon. R. |
Stanley, Capt. Hon. Richard | Turner, H. F. L. | York, C |
Stevens, G. P. | Turton, R. H. | |
Steward, W. A. (Woodwich, W.) | Tweedsmuir, Lady | TELLERS FOR THE AYES: |
Stewart, Henderson (Fife, E.) | Vane, W. M. P. | Brigadier H. R. Mackeson and |
Stoddart Scott, Col. M. | Vaughan-Morgan, J. K. | Mr. Herbert Butcher. |
NOES | ||
Adams, Richard | Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.) | Lipton, Lt.-Col. M. |
Albu, A. H. | Evans, Stanley (Wednesbury) | Logan, D. G. |
Allen, Arthur (Bosworth) | Ewart, R. | Longden, Fred (Small Heath) |
Anderson, Frank (Whitehaven) | Fernyhough, E. | MacColl, J. E. |
Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R. | Field, Capt. W. J. | McInnes, J. |
Awbery, S. S. | Fienburgh, W. | McKay, John (Wallsend) |
Ayles, W. H. | Finch, H. J. | McLeavy, F. |
Balfour, A. | Fletcher, Eric (Islington, E.) | MacMillan, M. K. (Western Isles) |
Barnes, Rt. Hon. A. J. | Follick, M. | McNeil, Rt. Hon. H. |
Bartley, P. | Foot, M. M. | MacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling) |
Bellenger, Rt. Hon. F. J | Forman, J. C. | Mainwaring, W. H |
Bence, C. R. | Fraser, Thomas (Hamilton) | Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.) |
Benn, Wedgwood | Freeman, Peter (Newport) | Mann, Mrs. Jean |
Benson, G. | Gaitskell, Rt. Hon. H. T. N. | Manuel, A. C. |
Beswick, F. | Gibson, C. W. | Marquand, Rt. Hon. H. A |
Bevan, Rt. Hon. A. (Ebbw Vale) | Glanville, James | Mayhew, C. P. |
Bing, G. H. C. | Gooch, E G. | Mellish, R. J. |
Blackburn, F. | Gordon-Walker, Rt. Hon. P. C. | Milner, Maj. Rt. Hon. J |
Blenkinsop, A. | Greenwood, Anthony (Rossendale) | Mitchison, G. R |
Blyton, W. R. | Greenwood, Rt. Hon. Arthur (Wakefield) | Monslow, W. |
Boardman, H. | Grenfell, Rt. Hon. D. R | Moody, A. S. |
Bowden, H. W. | Grey, C. F. | Morley, R. |
Bowles, F. G. | Griffiths, David (Rother Valley) | Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.) |
Braddock, Mrs. Elizabeth | Griffiths, Rt. Hon. James (Llanelly) | Mort, D. L |
Brockway, A. F. | Hall, Rt. Hon. Glenvil (Colne Valley) | Moyle, A. |
Brook, Dryden (Halifax) | Hall, John (Gateshead, W.) | Mulley, F. W. |
Broughton, Dr. A. D. D. | Hamilton, W. W. | Murray, J. D. |
Brown, Rt. Hon. George (Belper) | Hannan, W. | Nally, W. |
Brown, Thomas (Ince) | Hardy, E. A. | Neal, Harold (Bolsover) |
Burke, W. A. | Hargreaves, A. | Noel-Baker, Rt. Hon. P. J. |
Callaghan, L. J. | Hastings, S. | Oliver, G. H. |
Castle, Mrs. B. A. | Hayman, F. H. | Orbach, M. |
Champion, A. J. | Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Rowley Regis) | Oswald, T. |
Chapman, W D. | Herbison, Miss M. | Padley, W. E. |
Chetwynd, G. R. | Hobson, C. R. | Paget, R. T. |
Clunie, J. | Holmes, Horace (Hemsworth) | Paling, Rt. Hon. W. (Dearne Valley) |
Cocks, F. S. | Houghton, Douglas | Paling, Will T. (Dewsbury) |
Coldrick, W. | Hoy, J. H. | Pannell, T. C. |
Collick, P. H. | Hudson, James (Ealing, N.) | Parker, J. |
Craddock, George (Bradford, S.) | Hughes, Cledwyn (Anglesey) | Pearson, A. |
Crosland, C. A. R. | Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire) | Peart, T. F. |
Crossman, R. H. S. | Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.) | Plummer, Sir Leslie |
Cullen, Mrs. A. | Hynd, H. (Accrington) | Poole, C. C. |
Daines, P. | Hynd, J. B. (Attercliffe) | Porter, G. |
Dalton, Rt. Hon. H. | Irvine, A. J. (Edge Hill) | Price, Joseph T. (Westhoughton) |
Darling, George (Hillsborough) | Isaacs, Rt. Hon. G. A. | Price, Philips (Gloucestershire, W.) |
Davies, A. Edward (Stoke, N.) | Jay, D. P. T. | Proctor, W. T. |
Davies, Ernest (Enfield, E.) | Jenkins, R. H. (Stechford) | Pryde, D. J. |
Davies, Harold (Leek) | Johnson, James (Rugby) | Pursey, Cmdr. H. |
Davies, Stephen (Merthyr) | Jones, David (Hartlepool) | Rankin, J. |
de Freitas, Geoffrey | Jones, Jack (Rotherham) | Reeves, J. |
Deer, G. | Jones, T. W. (Merioneth) | Reid, Thomas (Swindon) |
Dodds, N. N. | Kenyon, C. | Rhodes, H. |
Donnelly, D. L. | Key, Rt. Hon. C. W. | Richards, R. |
Driberg, T. E. N. | Kinley, J. | Robens, Rt. Hon. A. |
Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C | Lee, Frederick (Newton) | Roberts, Albert (Normanton) |
Edelman, M. | Leo, Miss Jennie (Cannock) | Robinson, Kenneth (St. Pancras, N.) |
Edwards, Rt. Hon. Ness (Caerphilly) | Lewis, Arthur | Rogers, George (Kensington, N.) |
Ross, William | Sylvester, G. O. | Whiteley, Rt. Hon. W. |
Royle, C. | Taylor, Bernard (Mansfield) | Wigg, G. E. C. |
Shackleton, E. A. A. | Taylor, John (West Lothian) | Wilkins, W. A. |
Shinwell, Rt. Hon. E. | Taylor, Robert (Morpeth) | Willey, Frederick (Sunderland, N.) |
Short, E. W. | Thomas, David (Aberdare) | Willey, Octavius (Cleveland) |
Silverman, Julius (Erdington) | Thomas, Iorwerth (Rhondda, W.) | Williams, Rev. Llywelyn (Abertillery) |
Silverman, Sydney (Nelson) | Thomas, Ivor Owen (Wrekin) | Williams, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Don V'il'y) |
Simmons, C. J. (Brierley Hill) | Thurtle, Ernest | Williams, W. R. (Droylsden) |
Slaler, J. | Tomney, F. | Williams, W. T. (Hammersmith, S.) |
Smith, Ellis (Stoke, S.) | Usborne, H. C. | Wilson, Rt. Hon. Harold (Huyton) |
Smith, Norman (Nottingham, S.) | Viant, S. P. | Winterbottom, Richard (Brightside) |
Sparks, J. A. | Wallace, H. W. | Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A. |
Stewart, Michael (Fulham, E.) | Watkins, T. E. | Wyatt, W. L. |
Stokes, Rt. Hon. R. R. | Webb, Rt. Hon. M. (Bradford, C.) | Yates, V. F. |
Strachey Rt. Hon. J. | Wells, Percy (Faversham) | Younger, Rt. Hon. K. |
Strauss, Rt. Hen. George (Vauxhall) | West, D. G. | |
Stross, Dr. Barnett | Wheatley, Rt. Hon. John | TELLERS FOR THE NOES: |
Summerskill, Rt. Hon. Edith | White, Mrs. Eirene (E. Flint) | Mr. Ernest Popplewell and |
Swingler, S. T. | White, Henry (Derbyshire, N.E.) | Mr. Hugh Delargy. |
§
Resolved:
That until the Adjournment of the House for Christmas Government Business shall have
190
precedence at every sitting, and that no Bills other than Government Bills be introduced in anticipation of the ballot.