HC Deb 28 January 1954 vol 522 cc1964-8
Mr. Attlee

May I ask the Lord Privy Seal what is the business for next week?

Mr. H. Crookshank

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

MONDAY, 1ST FEBRUARY—Debate on new rifle at the request of the Opposition, until about 7 p.m.

Second Reading: Hill Farming Bill.

Committee and remaining stages: Development of Inventions Bill.

Motion to approve: Draft National Insurance (Married Women) Amendment Regulations.

Tuesday, 2nd February—Debate on Welsh affairs, which will take place on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House.

Wednesday, 3rd February—Second Readings: Electricity Reorganisation (Scotland) Bill.

National Museum of Antiquities of Scotland Bill [Lords].

Committee stage: Money Resolutions.

Thursday, 4th February—Second Reading: Industrial Organisation and Development Bill.

Committee stage: Money Resolution. Committee and remaining stages: Merchant Shipping Bill.

Friday, 5th February—Private Members' Motions.

Mr. Attlee

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider giving time, perhaps on Thursday when the business does not seem likely to be controversial, to a Motion on the Order Paper standing in the name of my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, South (Mr. Gaitskell), and others, on take-over bids?

[That this House deplores recent manifestations of the technique of take-over bids in so far as they have put large, untaxed capital profits into the hands of certain individuals and seriously under mined the policy of dividend restraint. It therefore calls upon the Government to appoint a committee of inquiry into all aspects of these activities, including the effect upon dividends, share prices, and company savings, the sources of the finance used, the capital profits obtained, and the counter measures taken by the directors of the companies concerned; such a committee to be empowered to suggest remedies as well as to investigate facts.]

Mr. Crookshank

I will consider that suggestion, but whether it is practicable for Thursday next week, I cannot say. Perhaps some conversations could take place.

Mr. Shinwell

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to a speech delivered by the Minister of Defence anticipating the White Paper on Defence, which indicates a departure from existing Defence policy? In view of the fact that this speech was delivered at the Constitutional Club, would it not be desirable that an early statement should be made in the House, next week if possible, following the lines of the speech made by the Minister of Defence? Ought Parliament not to be informed before the Constitutional Club"?

Mr. Crookshank

All I can say is that I read the reports of the speech of my noble Friend. As far as I can see, and as I am sure is the fact, there was no statement of policy in it at all. [HON MEMBERS: "Oh."] Nothing which he said yesterday has not been said at different times by other members of the Government, though possibly not in such eloquent words.

Mr. Shinwell

I am surprised that the right hon. Gentleman says he has read the speech—I take it that that indicates the reports of the speech—because what he has just stated is contrary to what is in "The Times" report of the speech, that the Minister of Defence clearly stated that he was making reference to a new defence policy. As the rest of the speech obviously indicated a departure from present policy, would it not be desirable that the House should be informed at an early date? Could we have an answer?

Mr. Crookshank

I cannot add to what I have said, that it was not a statement of any new policy. There was nothing said which has not appeared before in different forms.

Mr. Attlee

Was the Minister of Defence mistaken, then, in saying that he was stating a new policy?

Mr. Crookshank

He may have been misreported for all I know.

Mr. Shinwell

May I ask the Leader of the House whether the Minister of Defence, who is a member of the Cabinet, and who made this important speech at the Constitutional Club, was authorised to do so by the Cabinet?

Mr. Nicholson

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is not this Question time on matters of business?

Mr. Shinwell

Further to that point, Mr. Speaker. I did ask the Leader of the House, on business, whether we could have an early statement, possibly next week.

Mr. Crookshank

There is nothing to prevent the right hon. Gentleman from asking a question.

Sir H. Williams

Is it not a fact that there was absolutely nothing novel in the speech; that it was an interesting, comprehensive review of something which anybody who had studied the question could have made, but not quite so eloquently?

Mr. Crookshank

That is what I said, and—

Mr. Speaker

Order, order. We ought to get back to the business for next week.

Mr. C. Davies

Would the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the form of the Motion upon which Tuesday's debate will take place? As, under the Rules of the House, the debate may be very much limited by a mere Motion for an Adjournment, would it not be better if it were brought before the House in another form, perhaps on a substantive Motion?

Mr. Crookshank

I thought that last year's debate was on the Adjournment, but we can consider that matter. We do not want to hamper the debate in any way.

Mr. Beswick

Could the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that, if not next week, we shall have an early opportunity of debating the decisions, or lack of decisions, of the Commonwealth Conference at Sydney?

Mr. Crookshank

A communiqué was issued after the Conference and I have no doubt that my right hon. Friend, who, I hope, will return to this country today, will take into consideration how and in what shape he wants to bring the matter before the House should the House so desire.

Mr. Royle

In view of the fact that so much of the time of the House is being devoted to Welsh and Scottish affairs, will the Leader of the House give us an opportunity to discuss the recent serious floods in the County of Lancashire?

Mr. Crookshank

I do not see any opportunity for that at present.

Mr. H. Morrison

Could the Leader of the House find time next week for the Home Secretary to finish a speech he was making some time ago on commercial television, as there was a conflict between the statements of the Assistant Postmaster-General and the Minister of State which the Home Secretary was about to clear up? Would he not provide facilities so that the Home Secretary might do justice to himself and recover from the unfortunate mishap which occurred to him that night?

Mr. Crookshank

The issue was voted upon at that time. [HON MEMBERS: "No."] I do not think we had better have any more debates on that subject at present.

Mr. Edelman

Will the right hon. Gentleman say when it is the intention of the Government to publish the Bill on atomic energy, some details of which already appear to have leaked out to the Press?

Mr. Crookshank

I could not give a date yet.

Mr. E. Fletcher

May we take it from what the Leader of the House said a moment ago that, if time does not permit for a debate on the Motion for take-over bids next Thursday, an opportunity will be given in the following week for a debate on the subject?

Mr. Crookshank

No, I did not say anything of the kind.

Mr. Lewis

In view of the fact that the House of Commons in May,1952, unanimously agreed to the Motion moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, West (Mr. Pannell), and as there is still unanimous opinion in favour of that Motion, which my hon. Friend still has on the Order Paper, and that only a limited time will be necessary for it, will the right hon. Gentleman make time available for that Motion?

Mr. Crookshank

I am sorry that I do not now remember what happened in 1950—

Mr. Lewis

It was on equal pay.

Mr. Crookshank

No, there is no chance of an early debate on that.

Mr. Pannell

Would the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that many of his own back benchers are getting very uneasy about this matter and have put down a Motion on the Order Paper? Though that Motion was put down very much later than the Motion already standing in my name, will the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that it is his job, as the Leader of the House, to bow to the unanimous will of the House on occasions?

Mr. Crookshank

Yes, Sir. But I do not think that the hon. Member need worry about my relationship with hon. Friends behind me.

Miss Ward

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that there is also a Motion on this subject standing in the name of certain of my hon. Friends? Will he also not mind conveying to hon. Members opposite that we did not think much of their guts when they did not press their Motion as we are pressing ours?

Mr. Pannell

May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether it is in order for an hon. Lady to refer to hon. Gentlemen's guts and whether, if I had used that expression in relation to the hon. Lady, it would be taken as being ungentlemanly and unparliamentary?

Miss Ward

Will you bear in mind, Mr. Speaker, that I come from the North of England, where guts are guts?

Mr. H. Morrison

Can I ask the Leader of the House whether the hon. Lady really comes from the North of England, and whether her observation is an example of equal abuse for equal pay?

Mr. Crookshank

I really must decline to become the channel of communication between the two sides.