HC Deb 18 November 1954 vol 533 cc566-9
Mr. Attlee

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

The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. Harry Crookshank)

The business for next week will be as follows:

MONDAY, 22ND NOVEMBER—Lords Amendments: Town and Country Planning Bill.

Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Bill.

TUESDAY, 23RD NOVEMBER—Motion to approve: Draft British Transport Commission (Organisation) Scheme Order, until about 7 p.m.

Debate on: Opposition Motion relating to the Independent Television Authority.

WEDNESDAY, 24TH NOVEMBER—Debate on Welsh Affairs on a Government Motion to take note of the recent White Paper.

It may be necessary on any day to ask the House to consider any further Lords Amendments to Bills.

THURSDAY, 25TH NOVEMBER—It is proposed to meet at 11 a.m. and it is expected that Prorogation will take place shortly afterwards.

Mr. L. M. Lever

While realising that only a few more days remain in the present Session, may I ask the Leader of the House to bear in mind the important Motion on the Order Paper relating to war disability pensioners? Will he provide time in the next Session to debate this important matter?

Mr. Crookshank

The hon. Gentleman is very persistent, but I really cannot forecast debates in the new Session. I should think that that is probably a matter which came within the general scope of the debate which we had this week.

Mr. Shackleton

When may we expect the indemnity Bill to make an honest man of the Post Office? When it comes, will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that there is adequate opportunity for the House, as opposed to the usual channels that all Governments have used, to discuss this gross mismanagement?

Mr. Crookshank

As I have just said, I really cannot go into details of what is going to happen next Session.

Mr. Nally

The Leader of the House may recall that in April, 1949, with the consent and approval of the whole House, there was set up a Royal Commission on Betting, Lotteries and Gaming, under the chairmanship of a very distinguished former Conservative Minister. That Commission, after spending a great deal of public money, made its report, if I recall rightly, in March, 1951. The conclusions of that Royal Commission have been quoted as recently as a few days ago by Ministers in answer to Questions.

The question that I want to put to the Leader of the House is this. In view of the gross and unprecedented discourtesy to the Royal Commission, will he provide time at an early date for debating the Commission's report, and give an assurance that, irrespective of the conclusions, it shall be given at least half a day, if not a day, for discussion in this House; or are we to assume that the Royal Commission's report is no longer of any interest either to the Government or to the Opposition?

Mr. Crookshank

As I have already said, the business of this Session is a self-contained matter. What will happen next Session is not for me to say today, but at first sight it sounds as if the subject mentioned by the hon. Gentleman might well form a speech in the debate on the Address.

Mr. H. Morrison

As the Teachers (Superannuation) Bill has been put down again this week for Second Reading, after many other appearances, together with a Motion for its rejection by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition and others, are we now to take it that, despite its frequent appearances, this Bill will not, in view of what the Lord Privy Seal has announced, be taken this Session? If that be so, which appears to be conclusive, why has the right hon. Gentleman been going through this farce of putting the Bill on the Order Paper?

Mr. Crookshank

The right hon. Gentleman is surely aware that Bills stay on the Order Paper until the end of the Session, and this is one of those Bills. He is also quite right in assuming that it is not going to be taken on any of the three days next week. I hope he will appreciate that the intense interest of the Opposition in this Bill, which they appear to have wanted to debate almost every week, coupled with the irreconcilable Motion that they do not want it debated for six months, has been noted with very great interest by my right hon. Friend.

Mr. G. Longden

Will my right hon. Friend continue to ignore these weekly attempts by ostensible opponents of the Teachers (Superannuation) Bill to goad Her Majesty's Government into introducing a Measure which many on this side of the House consider to be unfair?

Mr. Crookshank

I have nothing to add to what I said to the right hon. Member for Lewisham, South (Mr. H. Morrison), except that I do not know why my hon. Friend calls the Opposition ostensible.

Mr. S. Silverman

Without necessarily endorsing all the adjectives used by my hon. Friend the Member for Bilston (Mr. Nally), may I ask the Leader of the House to bear in mind that the treatment accorded to the report of the Royal Commission on Betting, Lotteries and Gambling is not, as he described it, unprecedented, because exactly the same treatment was accorded to the Royal Commission on Capital Punishment, which was appointed earlier and reported earlier?

Mr. Crookshank

Exactly the same reply is offered to the hon. Gentleman.

Mr. Ross

Will the right hon. Gentleman have another look at Monday's business? Is he seriously suggesting that the Lords Amendments to the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Bill should be taken after the English ones? Is he aware that there are over 100 of these Amendments? Why should Scottish business of such an important nature as this be deferred until after the English business?

Mr. Crookshank

I think that, with assiduity, the House might well tackle the two sets of Amendments on Monday. The Scottish Amendments happen not to have reached us, whereas the English Amendments have. Therefore, it is quite reasonable to put the English ones first.

Mr. Braine

In view of the widely publicised news that next Tuesday's debate on television was to be on a Motion of censure, can my right hon. Friend say whether this is not now so? Can he also confirm that there is any truth in the report that the Opposition are experiencing great difficulty in finding subjects for censure which do not do themselves real harm?

Mr. Speaker

Order. I think we are getting far from the question of business now.