§ Mr. AttleeMay I ask the Leader of the House 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, 4TH JULY—Second Reading of the Road Traffic Bill, and Committee stage of the necessary Money Resolution.
TUESDAY, 5TH JULY—Committee stage of the County Courts Bill.
WEDNESDAY, 6TH JULY—Report and Third Reading of the Rating and Valuation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.
THURSDAY, 7TH JULY—Committee and remaining stages of the Miscellaneous Financial Provisions Bill, the International Finance Corporation Bill, and the European Coal and Steel Community Bill; and Consideration of the Motions to approve the draft Local Government Superannuation (Benefits) Amendment Regulations, and similar Regulations for Scotland.
FRIDAY, 8TH JULY—Second Reading of the Friendly Societies Bill, and Commit. tee stage of the necessary Money Resolution.
§ Mr. AttleeCan the right hon. Gentleman say when the Government will make a statement on the Report of the Monopolies Commission?
§ Mr. CrookshankI could not give a date for the statement.
§ Mr. AttleeDoes the right hon. Gentleman realise that we shall want to discuss this important instalment of setting the people free from private enterprise?
§ Mr. CrookshankI am sure that the right hon. Gentleman says that only after a very careful perusal of the Report. In every quarter of the House hon. Members will want a limited time to study the Report. I agree that in due time this Report will have to come before the House.
§ Dame Irene WardWould it not be a good idea to have a debate on rabbits?
§ Mr. H. MorrisonCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is proposed to 508 take the Committee stage of the Road Traffic Bill on the Floor of the House or in Standing Committee?
§ Mr. CrookshankWe had better get the Second Reading first.
§ Mr. MorrisonWill the Leader of the House take into account that this Bill affects every citizen, not only his personal interests but his personal liberties in many respects? Is it not the kind of Bill which, prima facie, ought to be taken on the Floor of the House? It is largely non-party. Will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the points I have raised?
§ Mr. CrookshankI will take anything which the right hon. Gentleman says into consideration, but we had better wait until we have had the Second Reading.
§ Mr. BellengerCan the Leader of the House tell us what is the Government's policy on the question of taking certain Bills on the Floor of the House and others in Standing Committee? Now that the Government have, 1 suppose, an adequate majority, would he have consultations with the Opposition as to which Bills are to be taken on the Floor and which can be taken in Standing Committee?
§ Mr. StokesRabbits upstairs.
§ Mr. GowerCan the Leader of the House say whether there will be an opportunity sometime this year to debate the latest Report of the Council for Wales?
§ Mr. CrookshankMy hon. Friend knows that in every Session there are a number of opportunities for discussing Welsh affairs. I am not certain whether by "this year" he means this calendar year or this Session. Anyhow, during the Session opportunities will arise.
§ Mr. RossHas the Leader of the House any information about future meetings of the Scottish Grand Committee, with special reference to the restoration of certain lost days mentioned by the Prime Minister yesterday? [Laughter.] We do not think this is a laughing matter.
§ Mr. CrookshankI am sure that the hon. Gentleman would be the last to bring a laughing matter before the House. If he is asking whether there is to be an opportunity, before the House rises, to discuss Scottish affairs—which is, I think, 509 the gist of his question—that is a matter which is now being considered through the usual channels.
§ Sir D. RobertsonCan my right hon. Friend try to provide time for a debate on the accounts of the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board, none of which has ever been debated in the House since the Board was formed, fifteen years ago?
§ Mr. CrookshankIt sounds quite a good reason for not starting now. I did say just now that conversations were going on about an opportunity for discussing Scottish affairs. Whether this topic would fall within them I could not say.
§ Mr. Ernest DaviesIs the right hon. Gentleman proposing to give an opportunity for a debate on the latest Report and Accounts of the British Transport Commission, in view of the contents of that Report, which reflect the wrecking transport policy of the Government?
§ Mr. CrookshankNormally, three days have been allocated for discussing the nationalised industries. It is up to the Opposition to decide which, and in what order they care to discuss them.
§ Mr. NabarroDoes my right hon. Friend recall that last week he expressed sympathy with the idea of an early debate on coal, in view of the present grave position? Can he say when it will be possible to have a debate on the coal industry or upon the Report of the Coal Board?
§ Mr. CrookshankNo, Sir, I cannot, for the reason which I have just given in reply to the hon. Member for Enfield, East (Mr. Ernest Davies).
§ Mr. BellengerCan the Leader of the House give me an answer to the question I asked him just now, namely, what procedure the Government propose to follow in this Parliament regarding Bills to be taken on the Floor of the House or in Standing Committee? Are the Government to be the sole arbiters of the Bills taken on the Floor, or do they intend to pay any attention to the representations of Her Majesty's Opposition?
§ Mr. CrookshankI should have thought that the procedure was well known in all quarters of the House. If 510 the Bill in question is to be kept on the Floor of the House, a Motion is made to that effect, and then there is a decision of the House. Otherwise, the Bill goes to Standing Committee. I do not know that any change in the procedure is contemplated during the lifetime of this Government, any different from any other.
§ Mr. H. MorrisonUnder that procedure nobody knows what is to happen until it happens. [Laughter.] It is quite true, and hon. Members who laugh are betraying their ignorance. Is it not the case that directly a Second Reading is carried, either the Government move that it is referred to a Committee of the whole House or the Bill automatically goes to a Standing Committee without debate? Could not the right hon. Gentleman agree to take into account the views of the Opposition and enter into consultation on this largely non-party Bill—not all of it is non-party—possibly with some of his own hon. Friends? The Bill affects the citizens' rights.
§ Mr. CrookshankI would not like to lay down any general line about this matter. There may be cases where it would be right and proper to have conversations, but it is not so always. I was not Leader of the Opposition in the days of the Socialist Government, but I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman took either us or the Liberal Party into consultation about what was to happen to his Bills.
§ Sir D. RobertsonHaving regard to the fact that over £200 million of public money has been spent by the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board, and that many crofters and farmers believe that they are being denied electricity which is their right, will not my right hon. Friend give my earlier question to him further consideration, because of its importance and urgency, before the House rises?
Mr. CrooksehankAll these matters are, of course, very important. I certainly sympathise with my hon. Friend for wanting to raise a matter which very much affects his and other constituencies in the North, but it is part of the general problem of how to debate Scottish matters in this House. I said that I was negotiating, through the usual channels, to see what could be done this summer.
§ Mr. CollickWill the Leader of the House consider giving further time for a debate on industrial relations? In support of that, may I say that during last Thursday's debate, which was supposed to be about the locomotive men's strike, not a single Member on these benches who had intimate knowledge of the dispute, was called. In those circumstances, and having regard to the large number of speakers on this side who did not succeed in getting into the debate, is it not desirable that further time should be given?
§ Mr. CrookshankAny comment I might make on what the hon. Member has said might be construed as a reflection on the Chair, which I should not like to make in any form, but I would say that I am not certain that it would be very timely to have a debate on that matter just at present. We had a very good debate last week, but these are delicate matters which are not improved by being debated too frequently in this House.