HC Deb 10 December 1953 vol 521 cc2175-82
Mr. Attlee

May I ask the Lord Privy Seal to 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, 14TH DECEMBER—Debate on Television Development, which will arise on a Government Motion inviting the House to give general approval to the Government's proposals.

TUESDAY, 15TH DECEMBER—Committee and remaining stages: Consolidated Fund Bill.

The debate on Television will be resumed and concluded.

Committee stage: Money Resolutions relating to the Housing (Repairs and Rents) Bills.

The order of business on Wednesday and Thursday will be announced later, but it will include a debate on foreign affairs and a debate on an Opposition Motion of censure on colonial affairs which, it is understood, is being tabled today.

I hope to be in a position tomorrow, Friday, to make a statement after the return of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

We still hope that all necessary business can be completed to enable the House to adjourn on Friday, 18th December, for the Christmas Recess until Tuesday, 19th January next.

Mr. Attlee

The Committee stage of the Money Resolutions on the Housing (Repairs and Rents) Bills is likely to be a highly controversial matter. I understood discussions were proceeding with local authorities. Is it necessary to take this Committee stage at present? It is almost certain to run late on two Motions which will be very controversial.

Mr. Crookshank

Of course, I do not know that it will be controversial; the Resolutions have not yet been tabled. My right hon. Friend the Minister, who has been having discussions yesterday and today on this subject with the local authorities, hopes to put down a Motion to appear on the Order Paper tomorrow. Then we shall be able to see how controversial it is likely to be. In reply to the right hon. Gentleman, who asked whether it was necessary to have these Money Resolutions now, in the view of my right hon. Friend that is highly desirable.

Mr. Woodburn

Further to that point, yesterday the Secretary of State for Scotland said that he was proposing to meet the county and other authorities on Monday. As these bodies have not themselves been able to meet to consider this matter, it seems very unlikely that any decision will be come to on Monday which could be debated in the House next week. Would it not be better to postpone the Money Resolutions until the matter is cleared up?

Mr. Crookshank

I was dealing with the English position when I spoke first. If any difficulties arise about the Scottish business, it is open to reconsideration.

Mr. Attlee

If the Scottish one may be postponed, is there any reason why the English one should not be postponed?

Captain Waterhouse

Is it not rather unusual to give time for a Motion of Censure which has not been put on the Order Paper? Has it really taken 10 days for the Opposition to come to a decision?

Mr. Crookshank

I understand that it has been handed in.

Mr. E. Fletcher

May we take it from what the Leader of the House as just said that the Money Resolutions which are on the Order Paper are to be withdrawn?

Mr. Crookshank

I think that might well be the implication.

Mr. Ernest Davies

May I ask the Leader of the House when it is proposed to have a debate on the Thesiger Report, in view of its commendation of the road passenger services of the British Transport Commission and its decision that there is no need for denationalisation of road passenger transport?

Mr. Crookshank

I am not proposing to find time for that purpose at present.

Mr. H. Morrison

With regard to the television debate, the Leader of the House will know that there is a very general—I will not say a unanimous, but a widespread—public feeling that this is an occasion on which it would be a great pity if the party Whips were put on. [Laughter.] I am sorry to hear that laughter, because it ignores the very general public feeling that it is a pity to drag the B.B.C. and all its affairs into party politics. [Interruption.] I could say some other things which it is being dragged into as well. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, therefore—with, if I may say so, deep sincerity—that the Government should be willing to take the Whips off on this occasion? May I say that if the Government do so, the Opposition will also do so? We are not asking the Government to do something we would not do. We will take the Whips off if the Government will do the same. I ask the right hon. Gentleman, in response to a great mass of decent public opinion, to give consideration to this request.

Mr. Crookshank

The Prime Minister made some observations on this subject on 10th November. As far as I know, it is a matter for each party to decide for itself whether or not it will have a Whip.

Mr. Morrison

I follow the point. But surely the right hon. Gentleman does not think that this is a matter upon which the parties act differently? If the Government put their Whips on, it is expecting rather too much that someone else will take the Whips off. The offer I am making is a perfectly fair one, and it reflects public opinion in this matter. I am definitely offering to the Government that if they will take the Whips off, we will take the Whips off. I submit to the right hon. Gentleman that that is a fair proposition which would receive the approval of the country as a whole.

Mr. Crookshank

I really have nothing more to say than to refer hon. Members to what the Prime Minister said and to note what the right hon. Member for Lewisham, South (Mr. H. Morrison) has said. But I still maintain that it is the business of each party to decide what action it will take.

Mr. M. Lindsay

Reverting to the Motion of Censure, has my right hon. Friend any information whether its terms of reference are to be sufficiently wide to discuss the fact that the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan), a Privy Councillor, is now writing for a journal in Cairo which is overwhelmingly hostile to this country?

Mr. Crookshank

I am afraid that I cannot say what may or may not be in order, however deplorable some of the things to which reference has been made.

Sir D. Savory

Can my right hon. Friend say when we may expect the long-promised legislation to give equity to the widows of the Royal Irish Constabulary?

Mr. Crookshank

I know my hon. Friend's deep anxiety on this problem, but I am afraid there will not be a debate on any Bill on that subject next week.

Miss Lee

Following the reference to the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan), may I ask that before a personal matter of that nature is raised, hon. Members should take their information from responsible sources? Then they would know more accurately what they are talking about. The second question I wish to ask is whether the Leader of the House can tell us when we are to have the Bill to abolish night baking, as promised in the Queen's Speech?

Mr. Crookshank

It will be presented very soon indeed.

Brigadier Medlicott

Can the Leader of the House say when it will be possible for time to be found to debate the Report of the Select Committee on Delegated Legislation?

Mr. Crookshank

We have only just received that Report and the Minutes of Evidence are not yet in the hands of hon. Members. I should like to say at once that I am sure the whole House is most grateful to our colleagues for the care and attention they have given to this important problem. I hope the matter can be ventilated in different parts of the House and, in due course, come before us.

Mr. F. M. Bennett

If the Motion of Censure on Colonial Affairs is on the Table now, can it be read out to us so that we shall know what it contains before the Opposition take it off again?

Mr. Crookshank

I do not know whether I am in order in reading from a copy which has been given to me. I assume it is the right copy. The notice is to move the following Motion in the names of the right hon. Gentlemen opposite on affairs in Africa: That this House expresses its grave disquiet at the handling by Her Majesty's Government of affairs in Africa.

Mr. H. Morrison

With regard to the Housing (Repairs and Rents) Money Resolution—[Hon. Members: "Oh."] I note the complete contempt for local government by the other side of the House. At the request of hon. Members on this side of the House, including myself, the Minister of Housing and Local Government was good enough not to move the Financial Resolution after the Second Reading of the Bill last week. The same is true of the Secretary of State for Scotland last night. Is the Leader of the House aware that when the local authorities meet the Minister, as I understand they are now doing, they will have to deal with many complicated matters? They must then report back to their local authorities and to the local authority associations, and it is not fair to rush them. If the matter were the other way round, and the local authorities were asking the Government to consider some complicated matters, the Government would want adequate time in which to consider them. Is it not reasonable, therefore, that the local authorities should have adequate time now? Surely if we take the Financial Resolutions quite early when we return, that will meet the general convenience, because the matters dealt with in those Resolutions will not arise until the financial Clauses in the Bills are reached.

Mr. Crookshank

The right hon. Gentleman seems to dart from Africa to local government and back again, and all I can say in reply to him is that it is quite wrong to say that the Government or my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government are showing any contempt for local government at all. In point of fact, my right hon. Friend has had discussions before with the local authorities. This is the second series which is going on now, and he is quite satisfied that they are being treated perfectly properly and fairly or he would not have asked me to announce to the House the course proposed.

Captain Pilkington

Since it would appear that the Motion of Censure for next week is wide enough to consider the articles written by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan), may we know before the debate takes place whether he has, in fact, written for that section of the Labour Party which wants the liquidation of the British Empire?

Mr. Speaker

We are concerned with questions on the business statement, and I hope that hon. Members on both sides of the House will not abuse the opportunity which is given them of finding out what the business is to be for next week.

Miss Lee

On a point of order. If references to any Member of this House are made in frivolous or unscrupulous parts of the Press, is it not the custom of this House that the Member so referred to should be informed before a statement is made; and secondly, that those statements should be based on the facts?

Captain Pilkington

The right hon. Gentleman should be in his place.

Mr. Speaker

I would say, in general terms, if an hon. Member wishes to refer to another hon. Member, it is customary to give him notice.

Mr. Hale

Further to that point of order. Is it not within the immediate recollection of the House that twice a disgusting smear has been made against aright hon. Gentleman in his absence and apparently no notice of any kind, sort or description was given, though it would have been perfectly easy for a note to have been sent to him, as is always sent from this side of the House to any hon. Member on the other side to whom we intend to refer? I ask, Mr. Speaker, for your guidance on this matter, and whether we are now to take it that this rule is in abeyance, and I shall be able to say what I think of hon. Members opposite from time to time without giving notice, a privilege which I should very much like to have.

Mr. Speaker

I should not like to commit myself in advance on whether anything the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Hale) may say is in order or not, but I have stated the rule in general terms. It is sometimes broken, but breaches are unfortunate and should be avoided. On the other hand, hon. Members frequently refer to a statement of policy made by an hon. Member from one side or the other, and that is quite a different matter.

Mr. Woodburn

Is it not a fact that this is not so much a rule of the House as a rule of good taste?

Mr. Speaker

The two categories of rule are not incompatible.

Major Legge-Bourke

In view of the fact that the foreign affairs debate will be the last opportunity before the Christmas Recess that hon. Members will have of asking the Government to make a statement on current foreign affairs, and if the Motion having been put down by the Opposition means that we cannot have a two-day debate on both T.V. and Foreign Affairs, will my right hon. Friend consider the fact that a great many Members of this House think that foreign affairs are a far more important issue than T.V.?

Mr. Crookshank

That may well be, but the fact remains that two days were promised a long time ago for a debate on television, and I should not like to go back on that decision, though I can appreciate what my hon. and gallant Friend says. The complications which have been brought into the rest of the week's business are not my fault.

Mr. Jay

On that subject, can the Leader of the House give us any reason whatever for refusing to respond to the appeal of my right hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, South (Mr. H. Morrison) in connection with the T.V. debate?

Mr. Speaker

I think all these questions have been answered before. We had better get on.