§ Mr. AttleeMay I ask the Leader of the House if he will state the business for next week?
§ The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. Harry Crookshank)Yes, Sir. The business for next week will be as follows:
MONDAY, 15TH DECEMBER—Committee stage:
Transport Bill [5th Allotted Day];
Report stage:
Iron and Steel Money Resolution.
TUESDAY, 16TH DECEMBER—Debate on Kenya until about 8 p.m.
Motions to approve:
Purchase Tax (No.8) Order, which brings furniture within the scope of the D Scheme established by Section 9 of the Finance Act, 1952.
Draft Clothing Industry Development Council (Dissolution) Order.
Draft Lace Furnishings Industry (Export Promotion Levy) (Amendment) Order.
Draft Lace Industry (Scientific Research Levy) (Amendment) Order.
WEDNESDAY, 17TH DECEMBER—Committee stage:
Transport Bill [6th Allotted Day].
Motions to approve:
Draft Apples and Pears Marketing Scheme.
Agriculture (Maximum Area of Pasture) Extension of Period Order, and a similar Order for Scotland.
THURSDAY, 18TH DECEMBER—Committee stage:
Transport Bill [7th Allotted Day].
FRIDAY, 19TH DECEMBER—It is hoped to adjourn for the Christmas Recess until Tuesday, 20th January, 1953.
§ Mr. AttleeMight I ask the right hon. Gentleman why it is necessary to rush the House over the Transport Bill to this extent? We really are being pressed very, very hard under the Guillotine procedure, and it is difficult to keep up with it for three days a week.
§ Mr. CrookshankI am very sorry. I agree that having to take three days on the Transport Bill next week means a considerable burden on Members in all parts of the House, but the Government wish to complete this stage of the Bill before Christmas. The right hon. Gentleman can take it from me that the days would have been better spaced if it had not been for the fact, about which I make no complaint, that the Opposition have taken up a couple of days in the past two weeks. Therefore, the spacing has not been as good as I would have wished. That is the reason.
§ Mr. AttleeThat is a point of consideration for the House. Naturally, the House has matters which it wishes to discuss quite apart from Government business. The right hon. Gentleman makes no complaint of that—
§ Mr. CrookshankNot at all.
§ Mr. AttleeThe right hon. Gentleman expresses the wish to get this Bill before Christmas. I do not know for whom it is a Christmas present, except the hauliers. I do not think anybody else wants it in a great hurry.
On Tuesday's business, the right hon. Gentleman will realise that the progress of events in Kenya is most disquieting. We have now had an important report from Sir Philip Mitchell, rather belatedly produced, and there is a considerable amount to discuss on that. Would it not be possible to have the whole day on Tuesday for that debate and to postpone these other matters?
§ Mr. CrookshankWe could not do that. We had a debate quite recently on Kenya; but, recognising the importance of this matter, I offered to the Opposition the chance of debating it again on Tuesday. I suggested that the debate should continue until about eight o'clock, but that is not a firm hour, if the right hon. Gentleman likes an extra hour or so. It was suggested because of the Purchase Tax Order. The tax begins to be payable on Monday and, as a general principle, it is better that the House should give its earliest possible agreement to changes in taxation. It is, of course, exempted business, and, normally, these Orders do not come on until after 10 o'clock. But on this occasion I thought that I was meeting the 671 convenience of the House by putting them on earlier. If, however, the right hon. Gentleman prefers to debate Kenya until, say, 10 o'clock, and to take the Orders afterwards, I think that could be arranged.
§ Mr. AttleeThe right hon. Gentleman will realise that the Purchase Tax question interests many people and that the Order has serious effects. It would certainly be undesirable to discuss those questions at a very late hour; but that does not seem any reason why this important business should be taken just for the sake of completing the Committee stage of the Transport Bill by Christmas.
§ Mr. H. MorrisonIn view of what my right hon. Friend has said, cannot the Leader of the House cancel one of the days on the Transport Bill so that we have two days on it instead of three? It is no answer for him to say that we used two days by bringing forward certain Motions which, he agrees, it was within our rights to do. The Opposition are conducting their case to the best of their ability under the Guillotine: it is not an easy life and it is a strain. It is a strain on Ministers, too; but the Ministers have the Civil Service machine behind them and we have not. It is a bit rough to have three days in one week on this Committee stage, and I cannot see why it is essential in the public interest that this Committee stage should be rushed through and finished before Christmas.
§ Mr. CrookshankI would remind the right hon. Gentleman that it is not proposed to take three days running. It is proposed to have the Committee stage on Monday and then on Wednesday and Thursday. I should like to remind the right hon. Gentleman that on Finance Bills it is quite usual to have three successive days in Committee, whether his Government is in power or ours. There is nothing unusual in that. As to whether it would be a good thing to have only two days, and to stand one over until after we return, I think that, on consideration, he would see that that really would not meet the general convenience. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] Because there is a great deal to be said for finishing the Committee stage and then seeing how we are with regard to the subsequent stages. If we had just one day hanging over for 672 over a month, it would make it a much more difficult problem for everybody concerned.
§ Mr. J. GriffithsIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in addition to the publication of the dispatch by the ex-Governor of Kenya, which we shall want to discuss very fully and frankly, there is on the Order Paper a Motion about matters in Kenya in the name of my right hon. Friends and an Amendment in the names of Members of the Liberal Party? In view of that, would not he agree now that it is absolutely essential to have a full day to discuss Kenya?
§ Mr. CrookshankAs I have said, this rests entirely with the Opposition. I offered them the day and said that the Government desired to get the Purchase Tax order. I thought that it would be convenient to have the Purchase Tax debate begin at eight or nine o'clock. If the Opposition take the other view and prefer to debate Kenya until 10 o'clock and then the Purchase Tax Order, the Government are perfectly willing to accept it.
§ Mr. BevanLast week, when we had a discussion on the Motion of Censure, there was a general desire expressed in all parts of the House that we should try to arrange our business in such a manner that it would not once more give rise to the ill-feeling displayed on several occasions recently. Might I ask the Prime Minister whether he will intervene in this matter? There is a universal desire in the country to have a full discussion on Kenya. It cannot be debated in two or three hours. Also, there is a universal interest in the Orders affecting clothing and furniture. They affect every household in the country. Is not it reasonable to ask for a full day to discuss these very important Orders? Is not it utterly unreasonable to ask us to discuss them after 10 o'clock at night? If the right hon. Gentleman is to ask for co-operation in the management of the British Constitution in a seemly and dignified way he must start making concessions. May I therefore ask the Prime Minister whether he will intervene in this matter?
§ The Prime MinisterI did intervene on the opening day of the Iron and Steel Bill, when I suggested that, instead of moving the adjournment of the House on Kenya, a whole day should be provided 673 for its discussion. But this was rejected, although, happily, the debate was not carried to a Division. Nevertheless, it was rejected, and we had a long and vehement debate then, and the position stands, therefore, in an entirely different light.
§ Mr. BevanMay I put this to the Prime Minister? Since that Adjournment debate—which was on a very important, but very narrow, point, which had been ruled by Mr. Speaker to be immediate and important—very many important events have occurred in Kenya, and documents have been published bearing directly on the competence of the Secretary of State for the Colonies. It is, therefore, necessary to have a full discussion on this matter now, but the point that I am trying to bring to the attention of the right hon. Gentleman is that, in order that we might have a discussion on these very important Orders, he is making the Orders the enemy of a full discussion on Kenya. Is it not, therefore, reasonable to postpone one of the Committee days on the Transport Bill, and have a proper discussion on these Orders?
§ The Prime MinisterI understand that the Leader of the House has offered from the beginning of the day on Tuesday up to dinner time or later for the discussion on Kenya.
§ Mr. MarloweMay I ask the Leader of the House whether his attention has been drawn to the Motion on the Order Paper standing in the names of myself and about 200 hon. Members relating to the retired pay of Service officers, and whether he can give a date for a discussion of this matter, which demands the urgent attention of the Government?
§ Mr. CrookshankI did note this Motion but I cannot find any Government time next week. There will be a debate on the Adjournment for Christmas, and I would suggest to my hon. and learned Friend that he might, perhaps, approach you, Sir, to see whether that debate could be fitted in on that day.
§ Mr. BlenkinsopFurther to the point concerning, the small amount of time available to us, may I ask the Leader of 674 the House if he is aware of the Motion standing in my name and the names of between 40 and 50 other hon. Members on the subject of the reduction of staffs in hospitals, which may very well affect every hospital in the country? Is it not very desirable that more time should be made available by cutting out some of the debate in Committee on the Transport Bill, which is of no interest to anybody?
§ Mr. CrookshankI did, of course, note that Motion, but there is no opportunity in Government time at present for a debate on that subject. We shall soon be coming to the period of Supply Days, and, of course, Private Members' Motions are still balloted for every fortnight.
Air Commodore HarveyWith a view to meeting the desires of the Opposition and of discussing these matters of taxation, could not the House sit another day next week?
§ Mr. CrookshankThe suggestion seems to be received with enthusiasm on the other side of the House. but I think that, on reflection, everybody will prefer to adjourn on Friday.
§ Mr. P. MorrisHas the Leader of the House forgotten that a debate on Welsh affairs is still outstanding? If not, and if he is likely to provide the necessary time, will he remember that the people of Wales would gladly sacrifice a day's debate on the Committee stage of the Transport Bill?
§ Mr. CrookshankI have not forgotten that, but I am sorry that it has not been possible to have a debate this side of Christmas, though, of course, it will come on very early after we resume.
§ Mr. JayIs the Leader of the House aware that there is no urgency, either, about the Furniture Order, which is not wanted by the industry or by anybody else? Why does he not get us out of the difficulty by withdrawing that Order and postponing the whole of that debate for a full day after the Christmas Recess?
§ Mr. CrookshankThat may be the view of the right hon. Gentleman, but it is not the view of my right hon. Friend, who 675 considers that, as the Order was made, it was desirable for the House to discuss it as soon as possible.
§ Mr. DribergThe Leader of the House will no doubt be aware of the undertaking given in another place yesterday by the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations that the Government will consider putting down a Motion in both Houses on which a discussion about the constitutional changes and the transfer of power in the Sudan could take place. Can the right hon. Gentleman give this House any information about that?
§ Mr. CrookshankI have not got in mind the exact words which my noble friend used, but at the moment I cannot make a statement about the Sudan, negotiations about which, as the hon. Gentleman knows, are still in progress.
§ Sir E. KeelingOn the question of Service pensions, may I ask whether you, Mr. Speaker, would consider, as the Leader of the House suggested, allotting time to a discussion of this matter on the Motion for the Adjournment for the Christmas Recess next week?
§ Mr. SpeakerI am still receiving requests for the allocation of time, and I shall have to look at all the requests when I have received them.
§ Mr. HaleIs the Leader of the House aware of the very grave situation which is developing with regard to unemployment in Lancashire? Will he reconsider the decision to adjourn on 19th December while all these vital matters, which require public discussion, are outstanding; and, particularly in view of Mr. Speaker's last observation that there are already far too many requests for matters to be debated on the Motion to adjourn the House, will he tell the House why it is necessary for the House to have more than a month's holiday at Christmas, when it only started work on 4th November and had 10 weeks' Recess in the summer? Is it not a shameful thing, in view of the magnitude of the problems with which we ought to be dealing?
§ Mr. CrookshankI do not know about only starting work on 4th November. It is quite true that this Session started then, but the last Session went on for a considerable time before that, in October. We have, in fact, been sitting rather over 676 the usual length of time for this period of the year. It is quite true that there is an enormous number of subjects which could be discussed, and I dare say that if we sat every day in the year we still would not exhaust them. But we have to consider all aspects of this problem, and the possible exhaustion of Parliament itself is one of them.
§ Mr. AttleeIs it not quite obvious that there are grave and important matters which hon. Members on all sides of the House desire to have discussed. We are to rise until the end of January. Surely we could discuss them if the right hon. Gentleman would not insist on taking up all the time on the unwanted Transport Bill.
§ Mr. GaitskellMay I support the request of my right hon. Friend for a reconsideration of the time-table for next week by asking, first, whether we are to have a statement from the Government on the Commonwealth Conference? I understand that this Conference ends today, and I understood from the Prime Minister that the Government would make a statement to the House. I would, therefore, ask the right hon. Gentleman when we may be able to debate that statement? Why should we not debate it next week, and drop the Transport Bill altogether for the time being?
§ Mr. CrookshankAll sorts of tempting suggestions have been made with a view to getting rid of the Transport Bill, but I must repeat that it is the Government's policy that the Transport Bill should proceed along its course. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] On the other point which the right hon. Gentleman made. I understand that the final session of the Commonwealth Conference is taking place this afternoon, and that a communiqué will be issued immediately afterwards. The communiqué will, of course, be issued in every country concerned, and not only the United Kingdom. I understand that that is the normal way of announcing the conclusion of Commonwealth Conferences, and the communiqué will, I understand, be published in the form of a White Paper as soon as possible. In regard to a debate on it, I think that the matters are so large in their scope that hon. Members, and other people all over the world, would require time to consider them before embarking on any detailed debate.
§ Mr. GaitskellAlthough we accept the need for a communiqué, because of the position of other countries, it is usual for the Prime Minister or the Chancellor of the Exchequer to come to the House and make a policy or personal statement on these occasions. Can I press the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Prime Minister to make a statement, perhaps tomorrow morning, on the Conference, and may I again press that that statement should be debated during the course of next week? It really is intolerable that we should have to wait six weeks to debate very important matters like these.
§ Mr. CrookshankIf the right hon. Gentleman looks up the past history of this subject, he will find that he is not quite correct. I do not think it has been the practice for statements to be made in this House on such occasions, but I am sure that my right hon. Friends will take note of what he says.
§ Mr. BevanIs it not quite clear that the decision of the Government to take the Committee stage of important Bills on the Floor of the House is preventing the House from discussing matters of very great public importance, and has this not been pointed out by hon. Members in all parts of the House? Why do the Government not send the Transport Bill upstairs and allow us to discuss these very important matters on the Floor of the House?
§ Mr. CrookshankThe right hon. Gentleman knows that the House has two functions. It is partly legislative and partly a forum for debate. We try to allocate the time between the two functions as well as we can.
§ Mr. SpeakerI would point out to the House that this is one of the allotted days for the Committee stage of the Transport Bill. We cannot further entrench on the Committee's time.