HC Deb 24 February 1955 vol 537 cc1449-52
Mr. Attlee

May I ask the Lord Privy Seal whether he will 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, 28th February—Second Reading: Public Works Loans Bill.

Committee and remaining stages: Northern Ireland Bill; and, if there is time, Fisheries Bill.

Tuesday, 1st March and Wednesday, 2nd March—A debate will take place on the Government White Paper on Defence.

The Government think it will meet the general wish of the House if two days were allocated this year for this debate.

Thursday, 3rd March—Supply [3rd Allotted Day]: It is proposed to move Mr. Speaker out of the Chair on Navy Estimates, 1955–56, and to consider Votes A, 1, 2, 6, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 15 in Committee.

Friday, 4th March—Private Members' Bills.

Mr. Lewis

In view of the great concern felt by hon. Members on both sides of the House, and even the deeper concern amongst the mass of people, about the continued rise in the cost of living, has the Lord President of the Council—I mean the Lord Privy Seal—seen Motion No. 38 on the Order Paper on that subject, which is signed by over 135 hon. Members? As the Government have promised since October, 1951, to reduce the cost of living, and have done nothing at all about it, will the right hon. Gentleman give time for consideration of that most important Motion?

Mr. Crookshank

I notice the Motion on the Order Paper, but next week we shall be dealing with defence matters.

Mr. Stokes

In support of my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Lewis), and as I think that the Leader of the House was not present during the earlier part of Question Time, when shocking revelations were made about the increasing price of food and the fact that seven staple commodities, taken together, have risen in price by 50 per cent. since 1951, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman does not think that the Government should pay some attention to this matter and provide us with an opportunity for debate?

Mr. Crookshank

The right hon. Gentleman is quite right. I was not here at the beginning of Question Time or I should have had quick answers to all his questions.

Mr. Nabarro

In view of the very great importance of the statement made by the Minister of Fuel and Power recently and the subsequent publication of a White Paper on a nuclear energy programme for civil purposes, can my right hon. Friend say when it will be possible for him to arrange a debate on the subject?

Mr. Crookshank

I am afraid that I could not. We all recognise the enormous importance of the implications of that White Paper, but I think that some aspect of it will come up on a Motion which is due to be debated tomorrow. As for other parts of it, I dare say that there will be opportunities in the normal course of business.

Mr. Robens

May I ask the Leader of the House whether the Prime Minister is to make a statement next week on whether conversations are taking place through diplomatic channels to discover the interpretation of the recent Russian Note?

Mr. Crookshank

I have no knowledge yet of the Prime Minister's statements for next week.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton

May we have some time in the not too distant future to discuss the secret arrangement entered into with the B.B.C. in 1948, because most hon. Members had never heard about it until a few days ago? As this is a House of Commons matter, ought we not to have an opportunity of being told about it?

Mr. Crookshank

As to opportunities of being told about it, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister answered Questions yesterday. The arrangements were, of course, entered into long before that and perhaps one of the other right hon. Gentlemen in the House will answer.

Mr. I. O. Thomas

Can the Leader of the House arrange next week for a full debate on the serious matter of the increasing unemployment in Northern Ireland and thus enable the Prime Minister to make a full statement on the position?

Mr. Crookshank

I cannot find any time next week for a debate on that subject, but the people of Northern Ireland need not be over-anxious, because representations are constantly being made by Members of Parliament for Northern Ireland.

Mr. Fernyhough

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that there is something indecent and disgusting in bringing before the House on Monday night a piffling little Northern Ireland Bill and finding time for that when he cannot find time for discussing unemployment in Northern Ireland?

Mr. Crookshank

When the House is embarking on legislative Measures, it is quite normal to go on until they reach the Statute Book.

Captain Orr

Can my right hon. Friend say whether or not he has had any representations through the usual channels to debate the economic position of Northern Ireland on Supply?

Mr. Crookshank

Oh, no, of course not, because the Opposition can choose any subject for Supply days.

Mr. H. Morrison

How can the right hon. Gentleman reconcile his statement that when a Bill is introduced the obvious course is to go right through with it until it gets on the Statute Book with the dillydallying week after week, and month after month, with the Bill dealing with teachers' superannuation?

Mr. Crookshank

The right hon. Gentleman does not always hear accurately. I did not say "obvious." I said that that was the "normal" course.

Sir R. Acland

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that last week we had a short and very unsatisfactory debate on a relatively small Supplementary Estimate for Kenya, during which no indication was given to us that a much larger Supplementary Estimate would be mentioned yesterday? Does not the Leader of the House feel that, in view of this, it is up to the Government to provide Government time for discussion of this larger Supplementary Estimate for Kenya, or must it once again be left to the Opposition to use up Opposition time?

Mr. Crookshank

The Estimates are entirely a matter for the Opposition to find time to discuss.

Mr. Swingler

May I ask the Leader of the House whether, in next Thursday's debate on the Navy Estimates, it will be the practice to allow individual Votes to be discussed or whether it is intended to move to report progress after Vote A, as was done last year? In view of Mr. Speaker's Ruling last year, this will affect the general character of the debate. Can the right hon. Gentleman let us know what the position will be?

Mr. Crookshank

I thought it was the normal practice over the years that a general debate took place on Vote A.

Mr. Swingler

Does that mean that the Leader of the House will not permit individual discussion on Votes, and that hon. Members must, therefore, raise all their questions on the Department in the general debate itself?

Mr. Crookshank

It is not for me to say whether I permit a debate or not. It takes its normal course and the Chair, of course, is in control.

Mr. Callaghan

Will the right hon. Gentleman ascertain what happened last year? If he looks up the records he will find that there was considerable controversy in the House, between the Opposition and the Minister and, to some extent, with the Chair, because of the apparent intention of the Government Whip to move the adjournment of the debate after Vote A had been discussed, and there were Rulings from the Chair. Although I do not press the Leader of the House to reply now, will he look into the matter and see whether we cannot come to an arrangement to shorten the debate on Vote A and have longer discussions on the succeeding Votes?

Mr. J. T. Price

With reference to the announcement made by the Lord Privy Seal that the Public Works Loan Bill will be taken on Monday next, would he not like to reconsider that in view of the dramatic and far-reaching implications of the announcement made this morning about the Bank rate, which is to be increased to 4½ per cent.?

Mr. Speaker

We are about to go into that now.