HC Deb 21 April 1952 vol 499 cc45-50
Mr. C. R. Attlee

May I ask the Leader of the House whether he has any statement to make on the business for this week?

The Minister of Health (Mr. Harry Crookshank)

Yes, Sir. The business for consideration today remains unchanged.

Tomorrow we propose to ask the House to take the Second Reading of the Housing Bill and the Committee stage of the necessary Money resolution.

Afterwards, consideration of the Motion to approve the Draft Fertilisers (United Kingdom) Scheme.

The Government have decided to ask the House to consider a time-table Motion for the Committee and remaining stages of the National Health Service Bill on Wednesday. The terms of the Motion will be handed in today and will appear on the Paper tomorrow. In order to give reasonable time for the Motion to be considered, it has been decided to bring forward the Housing Bill previously announced for Wednesday to Tuesday.

On Thursday we shall proceed with the National Health Service Bill, and consider the Motion to approve the MacBrayne Mail Contract.

On Friday, consideration of Private Members' Bills.

During the week we shall ask the House to consider any Amendments which may be received from another place to the Army and Air Force (Annual) Bill.

Mr. Attlee

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is proposed to carry out the procedure under Standing Order No. 41 under which, where there is any proposal for the Guillotine, there should be a Business Committee that meets to consider and specify the allotted time and all the rest of it?

Mr. Crookshank

No, Sir. It is proposed to suspend that Standing Order and for the House itself to settle those details.

Mr. Attlee

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that the trouble really arises from the fact that he is trying to take a complicated and technical Bill on the Floor of the House instead of upstairs? The debates on it have been very full, and it does raise very important matters which, I think, are much better understood on this side of the House than by the Ministers themselves. It is, therefore, essential that any consideration of the time-table for the Bill should be done very carefully. What is the reason for suspending the Standing Order recently passed in the interests of the whole House—Government, Opposition, back benchers, and everybody? Without giving any reason at all the right hon. Gentleman proposes to suspend it.

Mr. Crookshank

All those matters can be discussed when the time-table is before the House. The right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that we spent a great deal of time in the Committee on the Bill and have got only one subsection of the first Clause, and he knows the reasons for that.

Mr. Attlee

I know them very well. One of the principal reasons is that the Ministers do not understand their own Bill. Surely there is no reason why, if the right hon. Gentleman knows his case, he should not give us the reason for suspending Standing Order No. 41. Why should we have to wait until Wednesday for that?

Mr. Crookshank

I told the right hon. Gentleman in my first answer that it was proposed that the House itself should settle the time-table, which was always the case in the past, rather than adopt the other procedure.

Mr. E. Shinwell

Do I understand the position to be, Mr. Speaker, that the Government's Motion must be taken in two parts whenever the time arrives for taking it, presumably on Wednesday? Do I understand that there must be a Motion to suspend the Standing Order, and that if that is agreed to by leave of the House then the Guillotine Motion is presented? In other words, we are entitled to two debates. Is that the position?

Mr. Speaker

I have not seen the Motion, and I would rather wait until I have. Clearly, the Standing Order would operate unless there was a specific Motion before the House to waive it for that occasion.

Mr. Shinwell

The position, therefore, in regard to the Government's intention to suspend the Standing Order is, I understand, that it cannot be done without the leave of the House and that it can be debated.

Mr. Leslie Hale

Can the Leader of the House say whether he consulted Mr. Speaker before making this statement, in view of the fact that the appointment of the Committee to decide the timetable is in the hands of the Chair, and, indeed, comes into operation before any Motion can be put on the Order Paper at all?

Mr. Crookshank

All the proper steps have been taken.

Mr. Geoffrey Bing

Would the right hon. Gentleman clear up this point? Is it proposed to have one Motion or two Motions? If it is proposed to have only one will the right hon. Gentleman give some time for the House to discuss the question of Privilege, of attempting to incorporate in a business Motion an alteration of a Standing Order of the House?

Mr. Crookshank

I think it will be more convenient if we waited to see what is put on the Order Paper.

Mr. F. Beswick

Further to that point. Mr. Speaker, a moment or two ago you said you had no knowledge of what the Motion was. The right hon. Gentleman said that before he considered this Motion he discussed the matter with you. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] The right hon. Gentleman's actual words were, "All the proper steps have been taken." which, presumably, included a consultation with Mr. Speaker. Might we therefore ask whether, as a result of the consultations that the Government have had with you, Mr. Speaker, it has been decided to put forward one Motion or two Motions?

Mr. Speaker

I have not seen a Motion and the first I have heard of the Standing Order being suspended is this afternoon.

Mr. Shinwell

Do I understand the position to be this, Sir? Is it in your understanding of the procedure, Mr. Speaker, that if the Government intend to move a Motion to suspend the Standing Order, entirely upon the intention to move a Motion on the Guillotine procedure, that that Motion to suspend the Standing Order must be taken by itself? Is that the position?

Mr. Speaker

I think that is so.

Mr. Bing

Arising out of the announcement made by the right hon. Gentleman, would it not be for the convenience of the House, Mr. Speaker, if you were to exercise your duty under Standing Order No. 41 to nominate the five Members to be added to the Business Committee so that in the event of the House deciding not to proceed with the plan proposed by the right hon. Gentleman we could proceed with all speed to deal with the matter in accordance with the Standing Order?

Mr. Speaker

If the House does not resolve to waive the Standing Order on this occasion, I can assure the hon. and learned Gentleman that there will be no time lost by my slowness in appointing Members.

Mr. Bing

I think, Mr. Speaker, that you have not appreciated the position in which the right hon. Gentleman now finds himself. He is proposing to take on Thursday the next stage of the Bill. If the Motion is only passed on Wednesday it will be impossible for the Business Committee to be appointed and to come to the necessary Resolutions dealing with the matter and to have those printed on the Order Paper and have them circulated. Therefore, if I may respectfully suggest it to you, on behalf of the right hon. Gentleman, it is only fair that you should make your appointment straight away so that the right hon. Gentleman will not be embarrassed in the event of the House coming to the decision to uphold its Standing Order.

Mr. Aneurin Bevan

If, as I understand it, the right hon. Gentleman is bound to move the suspension of the Standing Order as a separate Motion, which apparently was not in his mind at first but is now that Mr. Speaker has ruled, it is obvious that the suspension of the Standing Order for a particular piece of business and not for the business of the House as a whole is an extremely serious matter. Obviously, a discussion on that cannot be a purely formal discussion, but is almost certain to take the whole of the day. How, is it possible, therefore, to consider taking the further stages of the National Health Service Bill on Thursday? I think the right hon. Gentleman is deceiving himself. Is it not perfectly obvious that his time-table is now hopelessly out? Is he going to gerrymander the constitution for his convenience?

Mr. Attlee

Does not the question of appointing a Business Committee only arise if there has been a decision to put forward a Guillotine Motion? Therefore, it would be improper, before a Guillotine Motion has been carried, to put down a Resolution suspending the Standing Order, because that would be in anticipation of what had not arisen. Is it not clear that on Wednesday we may discuss the Guillotine and that, whatever happens then, there will have to be another Motion on Thursday?

Mr. Speaker

I think all these things must be considered; but it is quite clear that I have no duties under Standing Orders in relation to the Business Committee until the Motion on the Guillotine has been accepted by the House. Therefore, there is no step I can take until I know the will of the House.

Mr. Bevan

In view of the fact that the Housing Bill is being brought forward, may I ask the Leader of the House whether we shall have the Housing Returns for the first quarter to assist us in our discussion of the Bill?

Mr. Crookshank

The right hon. Gentleman must ask my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government.

Mr. Bevan

The Housing Bill has been brought forward for the convenience of the Government. I inquired at the Vote Office whether the Housing Returns for the first quarter are yet available and they are not. We ought not to have a debate without having that very important source of information.

Mr. Crookshank

I must point out that it was with the view of meeting the convenience of the Opposition that we changed the debate. It would have been open to the Government to bring the Housing Bill forward on Wednesday and have the Motion on the Guillotine tomorrow, but we thought it would be for the convenience of the House and of the Opposition, in particular, that the order should be reversed. That was done not for the convenience of the Government, but for the convenience of the House.

Mr. Bevan

On a point of order. The Minister of Housing and Local Government has made a statement over the weekend of a highly tendentious nature and we are unable to test the accuracy of that statement until we have the Housing Returns. Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that the Housing Returns will be in the Vote Office tonight? That only leaves us a few hours to consider them, but we ought to have them before us so that we may know to what extent the housing policy of the Government has worked its mischief in the industrial districts.

Mr. Speaker

There is no point of order there for me.

Mr. John Rankin

Earlier in today's proceedings I addressed a question to the Prime Minister which he suggested I should put to the Leader of the House. I put it to him now. In view of the great many topics which the Prime Minister himself suggested should be raised in the transport debate on Monday will the Leader of the House consider providing two days for that debate to meet the desires of the Prime Minister?