HC Deb 02 December 1954 vol 535 cc314-8
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:

The debate on the Address in reply to the Gracious Speech will be continued on MONDAY, 6TH DECEMBER, and brought to a conclusion on TUESDAY, 7TH DECEMBER.

It would be convenient, Mr. Speaker, if you would be good enough to indicate to the House which Amendment or Amendments you propose to call and the days upon which they will be taken.

WEDNESDAY, 8TH DECEMBER and THURSDAY, 9TH DECEMBER—Second Reading: National Insurance Bill.

Committee stage: Money Resolution.

FRIDAY, 10TH DECEMBER—Second Readings: Wireless Telegraphy (Validation of Charges) Bill.

New Towns Bill.

Committee stage: Money Resolution.

Mr. Woodburn

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has given any consideration, as the Foreign Secretary promised, to the possibility of the Secretary of State far Scotland giving an explanation to the House of his proposals as outlined in the Queen's Speech? Other Ministers seem to have had the opportunity of explaining to the House their proposals, and I shall be glad to know whether the Secretary of State for Scotland is to have time to do so.

Mr. Crookshank

It is not so much a question of allocating time. The Minister of Education outlined the Government's general proposals with regard to legislation, and I understand that a specific question is being put down to the Secretary of State on Tuesday, which will then give him an opportunity of amplifying any points in regard to Scotland which were not covered in the references to England and Wales.

Mr. Woodburn

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, when the Secretary of State makes his statement on Tuesday, time will be allowed for Scottish Members to inquire further into those proposals? This seems a very important part of the Queen's Speech. It appears to Scottish Members that they have been treated rather less than courteously in the amount of time allocated to this question.

Mr. Crookshank

We do not allocate time. I think that the right hon. Gentleman is perhaps under a misapprehension. The debate on the Address is general, and there is no reason why hon. Members or right hon. Members should not raise any topics at any moment. There are only general indications, as I understand, of what is convenient with regard to some of the subjects during the debate.

Mr. Woodburn

Is it not usual for the House to have something to discuss? It would be very wasteful of the time of the House if hon. Members had to discuss the very nebulous suggestions in the Queen's Speech without an opportunity for the Secretary of State to explain these in detail to the House.

Miss Herbison

Is the Minister aware that when the Minister of Education was outlining the plans for English education he said that the problems of Scotland were different from those of England and Wales? When he came to deal with Scotland, only one minute was devoted—I do not think there was even a minute—to outlining plans for Scotland. Do I take it that on Tuesday there will be a statement, or just answers to a Question and answers to supplementary questions? If it is the latter, it simply will not suit the Scottish people, who are intensely interested in education.

Mr. Crookshank

One can always look into it.

Mr. Manuel

Really!

Mr. Crookshank

Perhaps the hon. Member prefers that I should never look into anything which happens. I said that when a Question was being addressed to the Secretary of State on Tuesday he would then be answering.

Mr. Woodburn

The Foreign Secretary, in outlining the Queen's Speech, was good enough to say that the Government would give consideration to the Secretary of State's making, in proper form, a statement which could be debated. We shall not be greedy and ask for too much time, but we are entitled to some time.

Mr. Crookshank

I accept that that is the case. This year it so happens—but I cannot anticipate what Mr. Speaker will say about the calling of Amendments. Perhaps I had better not enlarge upon that point.

Mr. Speaker

Now that the question has been raised perhaps I might indicate that I propose to call two Amendments standing in the name of the Leader of the Opposition and other right hon. Gentlemen. That dealing with instruments of mass destruction will be taken on Monday, and the Amendment dealing with social organisation will be taken on Tuesday.

Mr. Walker-Smith

On an English matter, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House will give sympathetic consideration to providing a day, if not before Christmas then at any rate soon after our resumption following the Christmas Recess, for a debate on Exchequer equalisation grants?

Mr. Crookshank

I could not commit myself to that, but we shall see how we get along. I would say to my hon. Friend exactly what I said to the right hon. Member for East Stirlingshire (Mr. Woodburn), that the debate on the Address is the annual occasion when all these matters can be raised.

Mr. Ede

Is it the intention to take the various Statutory Instruments relating to the Reports of the Boundary Commissions before Christmas? Will it be possible, through the usual channels, to arrange for a general discussion on the Reports of the Commissions?

Mr. Crookshank

Yes, Sir. It is the Government's intention to put those Orders before the House before Christmas. Like the right hon. Gentleman who asked the question, the Government feel that if an arrangement can be made through the usual channels for a general discussion on the issues raised, it would be a very good thing.

Mr. Woodburn

May I make a suggestion to the Leader of the House? There is still another day for the general debate on the Queen's Speech. Could not the Secretary of State for Scotland make a statement today? It would still be debatable as part of the debate on the Queen's Speech.

Mr. Crookshank

I will take note of that suggestion. The right hon. Gentleman knows that it is rather difficult, at short notice, to pledge one's colleague to make a statement. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] The Secretary of State for Scotland has not been given notice that these matters were to be raised, but I will certainly communicate to him the views of the right hon. Gentleman. Of course, the fact that the official Opposition have put down official Amendments for two days and we have found time for them does rather hamper the general debate.

Colonel Gomme-Duncan

There is considerable weight in what the right hon. Member for East Stirlingshire (Mr. Woodburn) says, because it is possible, and likely, that Oral Questions to the Secretary of State will not be reached on Tuesday, and that the subject will not come up at all.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

Is the Leader of the House aware that the continued absence from these debates of the Secretary of State for Scotland has led to the suspicion that he has either been liquidated or kidnapped? This is not the only occasion. It was so in the Civil Defence debate. The Secretary for Scotland is the missing link in all these matters. Will not the Leader of the House consider producing the Secretary of State in the flesh as a guarantee that there is such a person at the present time?

Mr. Crookshank

The hon. Gentleman's views are quite mistaken. It is not our practice to deal with any right hon. Gentleman or with anybody else in the way that the hon. Member suggests.

Mr. Walker-Smith

On equalisation grants, does my right hon. Friend appreciate that, though a speech on this matter would technically be in order on the debate on the Address, it would not fit very well into the pattern which has been drawn up for this debate? Will he bear that point sympathetically in mind?

Mr. Crookshank

I quite understand the point that my hon. Friend is making, but I must repeat that there is no pattern about these debates. It is merely indicated. For instance, I heard that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Don Valley (Mr. T. Williams) was to raise agricultural matters and that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries was to reply. So far as I know, there is no need for the debate to follow that line at all.

Mr. Paget

Is there any likelihood of the Government's providing time to discuss the Report of the Royal Commission on Capital Punishment? We have been put off for a very long time about this matter. The Report took the members of the Commission some years to produce, and it deserves to be considered.

Mr. Crookshank

Perhaps the hon. and learned Gentleman might like to make a speech about it today.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The business for next week has already been stated. These other matters can be considered later.