§ Mr. AttleeMay 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:
MONDAY, 31ST JANUARY—Second Readings:
Committee stage, Money Resolution.
Motions for appointment of Select Committee on Estimates and Joint Committee on Private Bill Procedure.
TUESDAY, 1ST FEBRUARY—Debate on Report of Royal Commission on Scottish Affairs.
WEDNESDAY, 2ND FEBRUARY—Second Reading:
Colonial Development and Welfare Bill.
Committee stage, Money Resolution.
THURSDAY, 3RD FEBRUARY—Debate on the Railway Situation.
FRIDAY, 4TH FEBRUARY—Private Members' Bills.
§ Mr. AttleeIs any consideration being given to the question of how the debate on transport will take place? Will it be upon a Motion for the Adjournment or a Government Motion?
§ Mr. CrookshankI should think that in present circumstances it would be most convenient to have that debate upon a Motion for the Adjournment. The House will realise that there will be 428 another debate later, arising out of the Transport (Borrowing Powers) Bill and the Transport Commission's Report on the future development of railways, which is a slightly different point from that which is the subject matter of this debate.
§ Mr. AttleeI should like to reserve the position. It is possible that the Opposition may put a Motion upon the Order Paper.
§ Mr. Emrys HughesCan the Leader of the House say whether his attention has been drawn to the Motion on the Order Paper dealing with a proposed four-Power Conference to discuss relations with the Soviet Union? In the light of the Note of 15th January, and in view of the change in the situation and the great public demand in this country that a new approach should be made in this matter, will not the right hon. Gentleman give time for this matter to be considered?
§ Mr. CrookshankI notice that the hon. Member has more than one Motion upon the Order Paper, but I know the one to which he is now referred. I do not see any chance, at the moment, for making time available for its discussion.
§ Mr. Ernest DaviesThe Leader of the House has stated that Thursday's debate will be upon the railways. Does that mean that it will be confined to that particular undertaking of the Transport Commission? Will not the debate be wide enough to deal with all the affairs of the Commission?
§ Mr. CrookshankIf the debate takes place upon a Motion for the Adjournment, the subject matter will be wider than it would be otherwise, but I had thought that what was wanted was a debate upon the railway situation as it has resulted over the events of the last few weeks.
§ Mr. H. MorrisonThe Leader of the House will appreciate that in debating the railway situation it is inevitable that we must bring in the other elements of the transport world, including commercial road transport and the question of an integrated transport system. This may involve legislation, which is one of the reasons why my right hon. Friend put forward the idea of a Government Motion. I presume that there will be no 429 difficulty, as far as the Government are concerned, about making the debate sufficiently wide.
§ Mr. CrookshankOf course; that is what the usual channels are for—to canalise these points of view.
§ Mr. RoyleCan the right hon. Gentleman say when the House will have an opportunity of fully discussing the situation in Formosa?
§ Mr. CrookshankI am not in a position to say anything about that matter today.