HC Deb 18 February 1954 vol 523 cc2156-61
Mr. Attlee

May I ask the Lord Privy Seal to state the business for next week?

Mr. Crookshank

Yes, Sir. The business for next week will be as follows:

MONDAY, 22ND FEBRUARY—We find it necessary to ask the House to consider a Time-table Motion for the Housing Repairs and Rents Bill.

Hon. Members

Resign!

Mr. Speaker

Order, order. There will be an occasion to debate this Motion next week.

Mr. Crookshank

This Bill is at present before a Standing Committee. The terms of the Motion will appear on the Order Paper tomorrow.

TUESDAY, 23RD FEBRUARY—Second Reading: British Industries Fair (Guarantees and Grants Bill.

Committee stage: Money Resolution.

Committee and remaining stages: Civil Defence (Electricity Undertakings) Bill.

Motions to approve: Draft Civil Defence (Police) Regulations, and similar Regulations for Scotland.

WEDNESDAY, 24TH FEBRUARY—Debate on the Berlin Conference, which will be opened by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary.

THURSDAY, 25TH FEBRUARY—Supply [4th Allotted Day]: Committee, which it is proposed to take formally, and then proceed to the conclusion of the debate on the Berlin Conference.

FRIDAY, 26TH FEBRUARY—Private Members' Bills.

Mr. Attlee

I wish to put two points to the Lord Privy Seal. May I ask whether he has been able to do anything about providing a White Paper on the subject of the Berlin Conference? Secondly, what is the reason for this indecent haste to introduce a Guillotine Motion on a Bill which is of very great concern and which requires the very careful examination which, I understand, it is receiving in the Standing Committee?

Mr. Crookshank

The short answer to the second point is that the Bill is not making very much progress in Standing Committee, but the reasons will be amplified in the debate which will take place on Monday.

As regards the first point, Her Majesty's Government have now decided upon the issue of a White Paper. Perhaps I may say that I am sure the House will realise the difficulty involved in preparing this White Paper at short notice, since the Berlin Conference only finishes today, and my right hon. Friend will be back in London tomorrow. However, I can assure the House that every effort is being made to have the White Paper available by Monday evening, and at all events before the debate on Wednesday. Since I have been asked, I would say that it is hoped to include in it the full text of all formal proposals made at Berlin and all the major speeches.

Mr. Attlee

I am very much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for his statement about the provision of a White Paper, but I can assure him that we shall require a great deal of explanation, on Monday, of the reasons for the timetable Motion.

Mr. Bevan

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is treating the House with scant courtesy to put down tomorrow a time-table Motion for debate on Monday. We shall hardly have any time at all to consider it. [Laughter.] I do not know what the hon. Member is sniggering about. We shall have only one day. Furthermore, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that far more progress has been made upon this Bill than upon many other Bills in Standing Committee where no time-table has been applied? Does he realise that this Bill amends 20 Acts of Parliament and deals with the most complicated legislation ever to come before the House of Commons? Is this not an outrageous way to treat the House? Is it not obviously a device to prevent us from exposing what this Bill is—a landlords' ramp?

Mr. Blenkinsop

In view of the Prime Minister's personal guarantee at the opening of the Session that full opportunity would be given for the expression of all views on this subject, will he now instruct his right hon. Friend to withdraw the time-table Motion, because it is a breach of his own undertaking to the House?

Hon. Members

Oh.

Mr. Crookshank

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman did not overhear it, but my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said, in quite a loud voice, "No, Sir."

Mr. Woodburn

May I ask whether the Electricity Reorganisation (Scotland) Bill has been postponed?

Mr. Crookshank

So far as next week is concerned, yes, Sir.

Mr. Chetwynd

Is the Leader of the House aware that his outrageous decision to introduce a time-table Motion is all the more outrageous because hon. Friends of his on the Standing Committee have asked hon. Friends of mine to expand their case from time to time because insufficient time has been given to it?

Mrs. Braddock

As the Bill is wanted neither by the tenants nor by the property owners, would it not be advisable to chop its head off altogether?

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. We cannot go into the merits of a Motion which is not on the Order Paper.

Mr. Callaghan

rose—

Mr. Speaker

If the hon. Member has a question relating to business for next week, we had better hear it.

Mr. Callaghan

I want to ask, Mr. Speaker, whether the Leader of the House does not think it appropriate that he should reply to the question by my right hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan), why it is so necessary to put the time-table Motion on the Order Paper tomorrow for debate on Monday?

Mr. Crookshank

There will be plenty of time for Amendments to be put down by Monday, and then they can be called. I did not reply to the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) because I did not think he expected me to; but I took note of the fact that he described the Bill as "a landlords' ramp" whereas the last time I heard him speak on the subject he called it "a mouldy turnip."

Mr. Bevan

I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that there is no conflict between those terms. Might I point out to him that hon. Members will not have the Motion in their possession until tomorrow, and that their only opportunity to consult together about what Amendments to put down will be tomorrow? That is rather short notice. Will not the right hon. Gentleman reconsider at least that aspect of the matter?

Mr. Crookshank

Tomorrow is a Parliamentary day, and I have to take note of that fact. I am fortified by the knowledge that this follows exactly the course taken by the right hon. Gentleman.

Mr. Bevan

It is not the same Bill, though.

Mr. Crookshank

That does not matter; it is the same precedent.

Mr. Woodburn

Was any attempt made to obtain a voluntary time-table before it was decided to table a compulsory time-table? Is it the Government's intention to act in a dictatorial manner in relation to Guillotine Motions, or will the Government extend to the Opposition the courtesy of giving advance notice?

Mr. Crookshank

Such courtesies were extended. I do not think it wise to go into the arguments now;they are, perhaps, more appropriate for discussion on Monday.

Mr. Gaitskell

Would it not be much better than proceeding with such indecent baste to this Guillotine Motion if the Government were instead to take the Second Reading of the Industrial Organisation and Development Bill, which they originally proposed to take a fortnight ago, and about which, I understand, they are having some trouble on their own side of the House? [Hon. Members: "Answer!"] Could we at least be told what has happened to the Bill? Are the Government going to proceed with it? What is causing the delay?

Mr. Crookshank

It is not being proceeded with next week.

Mr. Lewis

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider dropping Monday's business, because the Minister in charge of the Housing Repairs and Rents Bill has on no occasion complained of any filibustering or delay? My hon. Friends and I who are on the Committee are willing to meet in the afternoons and on additional days if need be so that the Bill, which to a very large extent affects old and poor persons, can be thoroughly discussed.

Mr. Speaker

Hon. Members cannot go into the merits of the Motion now.

Mr. I. O. Thomas

Will the Leader of the House provide time next week for discussion of a statement which appeared on the tape machine today referring to a "murderous attack" made upon "members of the Government" this morning, including the Prime Minister, the President of the Board of Trade, the Home Secretary and Lord Leathers, a former Minister? The report states: The figure of the Prime Minister has been in Madame Tussaud's since 1913. The same body has remained, but a new head has been made every five or six years. The head damaged today was a comparatively new one, but, fortunately, another head is in store and Sir Winston's figure will not have to be removed for treatment.

Mr. Speaker

Order. That seems to be very remote from the business for next week.

Proceedings on Government Business exempted at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1 (Sittings of the House).—[The Prime Minister.]