BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

HC Deb 03 November 1955 vol 545 cc1214-20

Mr. Attlee

May 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, 7TH NOVEMBER—Debate on the disappearance of two former Foreign Office officials, which will take place on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House.

It is hoped to obtain the Second Reading of the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill, and the Committee stage of the necessary Money Resolution.

TUESDAY, 8TH NOVEMBER—Second Reading of the Finance Bill.

WEDNESDAY, 9TH NOVEMBER—Second Reading of the House of Commons Disqualification Bill.

THURSDAY, 10TH NOVEMBER—Second Reading of the Sugar Bill, and Committee stage of the necessary Money and Ways and Means Resolutions.

Committee and remaining stages of the Rural Water Supplies and Sewerage Bill.

FRIDAY, 11TH NOVEMBER—Second Reading of the Post Office and Telegraph (Money) Bill, and Committee stage of the necessary Money Resolution; and, if there is time, Second Reading of the Local Government Elections Bill.

Mr. Attlee

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he could arrange for there to be more time to discuss the Prayer which is being put down against the Post Office telephone and telegraphic charges, because usually Prayers can be discussed for only a very short time in the evening? In view of the great amount of interest in the country in this matter, could the right hon. Gentleman find time for a more extended debate?

Mr. Crookshank

I do not know about that, because I do not yet know on what date the Opposition are proposing to put it down, but no doubt talks will take place about it.

Mr. C. Davies

In view of the statements made today and also last week, by the Prime Minister, could the right hon. Gentleman find time in the very near future for a debate on the question of the 14-day rule which applies to broadcasting?

Mr. Crookshank

I have not promised any time yet, and the reception of the supplementary question of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Leeds, West (Mr. C. Pannell) to Question No. 46 did not sound as if such a debate would be desired by all quarters of the House, but if there is a general wish for a debate on this subject, then, as the Prime Minister said, representations can be made through the usual channels.

Dame Irene Ward

On the business for Monday, may I ask whether the Foreign Secretary will be replying to the questions in the Motion^* which stands in my name on the Notice Paper? I should very much like answers to those questions.

Mr. Crookshank

It is intended at present that the Foreign Secretary should open the debate.

Dame Irene Ward

And answer those questions?

Mr. Crookshank

I cannot dictate his speech, any more than my hon. Friend can.

Mr. C. Davies

With regard to the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion that a debate on the 14-day rule could be arranged through the usual channels, how can they possibly work in this case when the leading Members of the Opposition are really the strongest supporters of that ban?

Mr. H. Morrison

The right hon. and learned Gentleman was, too.

Mr. Davies

Cannot we make direct representations to the right hon. Gentleman on this matter?

Mr. H. Fraser

Would my right hon. Friend consider, before the Christmas Recess, having at least a half-day's discussion of the Reports and Statements of Account of the North of Scotland Hydro-Electricity Board? In ten years they have not been discussed. It seems to me that at a time when the capital expenditure of the Government and others is being considered there should be reassurance that the very large sums involved in those accounts are being entirely well spent.

^*[See OFFICIAL REPORT, Monday. 7th November, 1955, column 1485.]

Mr. Crookshank

I cannot pledge myself as far as Christmas. We have only just come back again. However, I will note what my hon. Friend has said.

Mr. Glenvil Hall

Have the Government yet come to any conclusions on the Report of the Select Committee on Private Bill Procedure?

Mr. Crookshank

No, but I hope that we shall be able to make a statement fairly soon. The matter is still being considered.

Mr. Nicholson

Reverting to the answer given to the Leader of the Opposition, did my right hon. Friend imply that he was going beyond or outside the arrangement at present adopted, and which was adopted on the recommendation of a Select Committee, for the way in which Prayers should be dealt with?

Mr. Crookshank

I do not think that that was implicit in what the right hon. Gentleman asked me.

Mr. Monslow

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider having a debate on what, in the light of the Budget, has now become the parlous plight of the old-age pensioners?

Mr. Crookshank

That is not likely in the immediate future.

Sir F. Medlicott

In view of the seriousness of the issues raised by the disappearance of Burgess and Maclean and the fact that these issues have occupied a term of over twenty years, is it not possible to give rather more than three hours to the discussion of this matter, which is vital to the security of the Realm?

Mr. Crookshank

I think my hon. Friend is under a misapprehension. The debate is for all Monday, not only three hours.

Mr. Paget

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Committee stage of the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill is the only opportunity this House has to discuss a number of highly important subjects, including the whole of the aliens' law? That being so, is it really fair to put that down for after business on Monday? I shall be putting down a number of Amendments, and I think that some of my hon. Friends will be, too.

Mr. Crookshank

I am sorry that there seems to be some misunderstanding about Monday. I said that there will be a debate on the disappearance of the two former Foreign Office officials, which will last the whole day, and that it is hoped to obtain the Second Reading, not the Committee stage, of the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill.

Mr. Paget

It was a slip of the tongue.

Mr. Crookshank

It was a slip of the hon. and learned Gentleman's ears.

Mr. Usborne

Referring to the 14-day broadcasting ban, may I ask whether the Leader of the House remembers that the Prime Minister, I think on two occasions, said that so far as he was concerned it would probably be possible, after discussion through the usual channels, to have a debate on the ban? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I suspect that the House cheered what my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, West (Mr. C. Pannell) said a few minutes ago probably not entirely because it approved of the content of what he said—[HON. MEMBERS: "We did."]—but because of the way in which he said it, which was very funny?

Mr. Donnelly

Could we have an answer on what is to be done about the 14-day rule? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the very worst way in which we could deal with it is to listen to the hidebound or the envious, and that this ban involves people outside the House as well, and that there is a principle involved? Could we not clear the matter up and have done with it by having time allotted for a debate upon it?

Mr. Crookshank

I think I made it quite clear. First of all, my right hon. Friend did not promise any debate. What he said was, and what I say is, that if there is a general desire for a debate it can be made known through the usual channels.

Mr. Usborne

But what is the use of the usual channels in this case?

Mr. Lewis

Has the Minister's attention been drawn to a statement in last night's "Evening Standard" which says: The Burgess-Maclean debate is to take place on Monday. The Prime Minister is to take part in that debate."? Can I ask whether or not this information was given to the "Evening Standard" by the Government last night before the House received it, or is this another official leak that we keep getting from Government Departments whereby the House does not receive information before the Press outside? Has the Minister's attention been drawn to this?

Mr. Crookshank

I have not seen that.

Mr. Speaker

That is really not a question on business at all.

Mr. Rankinrose—

Mr. Speaker

Does the hon. Member wish to ask a question on the business for next week?

Mr. Rankin

Yes, Sir. I should like to ask the Leader of the House, in view of his failure to reply to the question by my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Lewis), whether he can say whether it was Burgess or Maclean who supplied the information?

Mr. Lewis

On a point of order. May I raise this matter with you, Mr. Speaker, as something which affects every hon. Member, particularly back benchers on both sides of the House, in connection with business? We are told that as back benchers we can obtain information which is usually asked for by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition on Thursday afternoon. I should like to ask what safeguards and guarantees we have as back benchers when it is obvious from this Press report that an official hand-out must have been given to the Press, since there was a verbatim statement in last night's "Evening Standard" that a debate would take place on Monday next and that the Prime Minister would take part in it. To what extent can we as back benchers have the right to see that the Government do not give the Press information before we receive it in the House?

Mr. Drayson

Is it not a fact that discussions take place between the usual channels before the business programme is agreed upon?

Mr. Speaker

No doubt they do, but what people write in newspapers is no concern of Ministers and really should not be the basis of a Parliamentary Question. I do not think that there is anything very serious in this. Newspaper reporters are often very intelligent men. They often anticipate events, sometimes rightly, sometimes wrongly. I do not think that there is any great principle involved in this.

Mr. H. Morrison

I submit, with respect, Mr. Speaker, that my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Lewis) is in order. The Leader of the House has announced the business for next week and I submit, with respect, that it was legitimate for my hon. Friend to ask why a newspaper had information last night about some of the business next week, which is only conveyed to the House this afternoon. I submit that my hon. Friend's question was relevant to the statement about business.

Mr. Speaker

I did not in any sense rule the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Lewis) out of order. I only said, in doing my best to reply to his question, that I did not think that there was any great point of principle in it, because newspapers publish all sorts of things and I do not think that one can make a great point of constitutional principle about something that appears in a newspaper.

Mr. Lewis

Perhaps I did not put my point of order to you in clear enough language, Mr. Speaker. The point that I want to make is that we as back benchers have very limited rights in the House. As back benchers, we do not know officially about the following week's business until 3.30 on Thursday afternoons. Then, if hon. Members wish to raise certain matters they can, subject to catching your eye, put a supplementary question. But if, in fact, the Press has quite obviously been given an official hand-out—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] If it is not an official hand-out I do not know how the Press can say definitely what type of debate is to take place on a certain day and who is to take part in it. Can back benchers have the same privileges given to them as are obviously given to the "Evening Standard"?

Mr. Speaker

I do not think that the hon. Member has proved his case that special privileges have been given to the "Evening Standard." I have seen many instances in my life of intelligent anticipation by newspapers, and that is all that I can say about it. As regards back benchers—and I here speak as a fairly old Member—if I wanted to find out in advance what the business was to be, so as to make some arrangements of my own about it, I generally found what are called "the usual channels" very helpful, in so far as they could be. I think that the advice that I can give to the hon. Member is that if he wishes to have the earliest possible information about any particular item of business that is coming on he should ask his Whips. I am sure that they would be quite as helpful to him as to others.

Mr. Bellenger

Would it not be true to say, Mr. Speaker, that your own experience in obtaining advance information was due to the way you proceeded to obtain it?

Mr. Crookshank

May I finally settle this matter by saying that no statement was made to the "Evening Standard" or anybody else about Monday's business? What I announce to the House on Thursdays is very often fluid until the last few minutes. There is always the possibility of last-minute changes, so that anything said anywhere prior to that is not much more than intelligent anticipation.

Mr. Berwick

Does not much of this arise from the statement made yesterday, or the day before, by the Prime Minister, who said that it was possible, within a fortnight of what was to be debated in the House for any individual, whether on behalf of the Press or the radio, to obtain information?

Mr. Speaker

It seems to me quite clear that the business of the House can never be rigidly forecast. There are always all sorts of contingencies that arise and upset the most carefully arranged plan, but we have to put up with that. If the hon. Member for West Ham, North asks his Whips, I am sure that they will help him in every way they can.