BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (Hansard, 3 March 1955)

§ The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. Harry Crookshank)
I beg to move, That the debate be now adjourned.
I have intervened for a moment to deal with the business of the House, and, to set myself in order, I have moved this Motion. Conversations have taken place through the usual channels about the arrangements for the discussions on the Service Estimates. It has been agreed that we obtain Vote A of the Navy Estimates tonight, Vote A of the Army next Tuesday and Vote A of the Air next Thursday. The Committee stage of the necessary Money Votes for the Navy, Army and Air Services will be put down on another Allotted Supply Day and, if necessary, discussion can be continued at the Report stage.
I hope that these arrangements will commend themselves to the House and that we shall obtain the necessary Business tonight, and on the later occasions at a reasonable hour—by which I mean in this case, shall we say, about midnight or, of course, if we are more reasonable, it might be earlier.

§ Mr. James Callaghan (Cardiff, South-East)
This, as the Leader of the House says, has been done through the usual channels. It is a common belief amongst all except the usual channels that the usual channels make their arrangements to suit themselves and no one else, but I hope on this occasion that it will be thought that what the usual channels have done commends itself to those in all parts of the House wherever they may sit.
As I understand it, this will mean that the Votes which have been put down on the Order Paper today, apart from Vote 2302 A, will not be taken tonight but on another occasion. That I would regard as being the best way of proceeding with public business. As to the time at which we adjourn, that is not within the control of any of us. This is a traditional occasion on which those who have grievances about Supply seek to have them remedied, so no doubt the debate will carry on for a period until those who wish to make speeches have made them. I am sure that there will be co-operation from everybody, and knowing the kind of reply we shall get from the Government Front Bench, it should enable us to call off the battle before dawn.

§ Mr. George Wigg (Dudley)
Would the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to clear up two points? First, on the Order Paper today there is Vote A and a number of other Votes. I take it that this happens because this arrangement was not concluded until a few minutes ago. In future, that is to say, on the Army and Air Estimates, and in future years, all that will be put down will be Vote A and the other Votes will only come forward on the Committee stage or in accordance with such arrangements as are made through the usual channels. I do not want to confuse the right hon. Gentleman, who looks puzzled, so I will put my other question after he has answered this one. Can I have an answer?

§ Mr. Crookshank
I think that is correct. Of course I am not dealing with future years at the moment—sufficient unto one year is its troubles—but the hon. Gentleman is quite right: on the Order Paper is Vote A and the other Votes. They will not be taken tonight but they will be taken on another Allotted Supply Day, as I have announced. I do not think there is any difficulty about that.

§ Mr. William Whiteley (Blaydon)
My hon. Friend meant this, that on Tuesday next we shall take Vote A and not the Money Votes, and on Thursday we shall take Vote A and not the Money Votes?

§ Mr. Crookshank
I understand that is in order. Of course, if it is not in order, we may technically have to put the other Votes down, though we shall not be taking them.

§ Mr. Wigg
I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman, but I am always a little 2303 worried when he looks puzzled and uncertain because, although he is not now establishing what will happen in future years, what we do now will be a precedent. We all hope it will work; I certainly do. Therefore it is important to be clear. May I ask the second question now? You, Mr. Speaker, gave a Ruling a year ago to my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mr. Swingler) which greatly broadened our debates and did not improve them to my mind, because it brought about a ragged situation. Whilst it is necessary at all costs to preserve the rights of back benchers, would you be good enough to look at the rules of order to see whether it is possible to secure something like a Second Reading debate? The question of broad principle of a Vote A debate by the procedure suggested by the right hon. Gentleman has become a permanent part of our affairs.

§ Mr. Stephen Swingler (Newcastle-under-Lyme)
As my hon. Friend says, I raised this matter on a number of occasions last year, and I should like to thank the Leader of the House for his announcement and all those of the usual channels who have contributed to what is a step in the right direction. Perhaps some of us might claim that by our nocturnal activities last year we contributed in a small way towards this step. May I say, too, that I think this is only one step forward and I hope that we shall move forward to the consideration of the question of Committee stages on these Votes for all three Services. What some of us have been concerned about previously is that we should be able to have Estimates debates that are Second Reading debates on the general policies of the three Services, and should be able to take the Votes separately on separate Parliamentary days as a proper Committee stage.
I recognise that this is a step in the right direction, which, as my hon. Friend says, will avoid some of the confusion which arose previously by having general and detailed points raised in the debates on the Service Estimates. I hope, however, that the usual channels will continue to function on this issue, because problems of lack of time are still presented by the immense questions which are raised in the Service debates. In the light of 2304 how the new arrangement functions, it may be that more Parliamentary days may be found so that hon. Members will have a greater opportunity of discussing these matters.

§ Mr. Crookshank
However that may be, it seems that the suggestion which I have made is agreeable to hon. Members in all quarters of the House. So that we may proceed with the proper debate—

§ Mr. Michael Foot (Plymouth, Devonport)
May I say this? I certainly agree with the general sense of the opinion which has been expressed about this arrangement, but do I understand aright that the ideal of concluding the debate at a certain time is only a general hope and aspiration, and that no mechanical means would be employed to ensure that that arrangement should be concluded if there were Members of the House who wished to exercise the rights that they have always had on these occasions?

§ Mr. Crookshank
Hope springs eternal, at any rate in my breast. As we do not want to start a procedural debate on this Motion, perhaps the House will allow me——

§ Mr. Wigg
Before the right hon. Gentleman finishes, there is one further point on this important matter. We proceed to reform only by gradual process, one step at a time. As my hon. Friend has said, the right hon. Gentleman has taken a step in the right direction. Now we want him to take one more step. If he and the Government would consider a means whereby we could get rid of the silly business of having a Ballot—I say this in all respect to my hon. Friend who is lucky tonight——

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Member has made two speeches already. I do not think that the Ballot is involved in what the right hon. Gentleman has said. He said nothing about the Ballot.

§ Mr. Wigg
With respect, Mr. Speaker, I was asking the right hon. Gentleman, now that he has taken this step, whether he would look at the whole of our procedure on Estimates in order to bring about this next desirable reform. If he will do this, he will find his place in posterity in a monument in which he is both admiral, field marshal and air chief 2305 marshal, and he would be doing the House a great service.

§ Mr. Crookshank
In anticipation of all those honours, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Motion.