HC Deb 23 January 1958 vol 580 cc1258-63
Mr. Gaitskell

May I ask the Lord Privy Seal whether he will announce the business for next week?

The Secretary of State for the Home Department and Lord Privy Seal (Mr. R. A. Butler)

Yes, Sir. The business for next week will be as follows:

MONDAY, 27TH JANUARY—Debate on the Reports and Accounts of the British Overseas Airways Corporation, and of the British European Airways until 7 o'clock.

Afterwards, there will be a debate on the Report and Accounts of the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board.

TUESDAY, 28TH JANUARY—Second Reading of the Overseas Resources Development Bill.

Committee stage of the necessary Money Resolution.

Second Reading of the British Nationality Bill [Lords].

Third Reading of the Post Office and Telegraph (Money) Bill.

Second Reading of the Entertainments Duty Bill [Lords], which is a consolidation Measure.

WEDNESDAY, 29TH JANUARY—Committee and, if possible, the remaining stages of the Cayman Islands and Turks and Caicos Islands Bill; and of the Overseas Service Bill.

Report stage of the Import Duties Bill.

Consideration of the Motions to approve the Anti-Dumping (No. 1) Order; and the Draft Silo Subsidies (Variation) (England and Wales and N. Ireland) Scheme, and a similar Scheme for Scotland.

THURSDAY, 30TH JANUARY—A debate will take place on the Report of the Tribunal appointed to Inquire into Allegations of Improper Disclosure of Information relating to the Raising of the Bank Rate.

FRIDAY, 31ST JANUARY—Consideration of Private Members' Motions.

Mr. Gaitskell

In view of the importance of the Report of the Tribunal which we are to debate on Thursday, and because it refers to two matters which the Tribunal itself did not attempt to pronounce upon but specifically referred to Parliament, and as a great many hon. Members will wish to speak in the debate, may I ask the Leader of the House whether he will find an extra day?

Mr. Butler

We are under no illusion as to the importance of the Report, but we are not ready to find an extra day. We consider that one day's debate is sufficient.

Mr. Gaitskell

May I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that we might postpone the debate on the British Overseas Airways Corporation and the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board, put the other two days' business on to Monday and Tuesday and have the debate on the Tribunal's Report on Wednesday and Thursday?

Mr. Butler

We have considered this matter and we consider that one day should be adequate in which to discuss the Tribunal's Report.

Mr. J. Stuart

In view of the amount of time and public money which has already been wasted in investigating unfair and unfounded allegations made by certain hon. Gentlemen opposite, may I suggest that the Leader of the House is right in saying that one day is sufficient?

Mr. Gaitskell

Although I consider that the Government should find two days for the debate on the Report, I ask the Leader of the House whether he is prepared to come to an arrangement by which we would give up one of our Supply Days, which can be deducted later, the business can be altered, and we can have our two days' debate on the Report. It is a very reasonable proposal, if I may say so, and I ask the right hon. Gentleman to give us a favourable answer.

Mr. Butler

It is always very agreeable to have an offer of time from the Opposition, but that does not alter my view that one day is sufficient for discussing the Tribunal's Report.

Mr. Lindgren

What is the Leader of the House afraid of?

Mr. Butler

If the right hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends want to come back to it later, they can do so, but I suggest that we have this debate on Thursday, which, I think, will be regarded as sufficient for discussing the Report.

Mr. Gaitskell

We cannot come back to this later; we have to settle it now. We have made a proposal which does not involve taking any extra Government time, and I cannot see what possible objection there can be from the Government point of view. It will be easy to rearrange the business for next week so as to have the debate on the Tribunal's Report on Wednesday and Thursday, one of those days being an Opposition Supply Day, so I ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider this very generous offer and give us a favourable reply.

Mr. Butler

I only heard the suggestion shortly before coming into the House. I still remain of the opinion that one day is sufficient, but I will discuss this proposal through the usual channels because I have not had proper notice of it.

Mr. Dudley Williams

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. There are many hon. Members on this side of the House who would like to express their views on the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman. May I suggest that, in view of the fact that there have been about six or seven interventions by Privy Councillors opposite, it would be more in keeping with our normal practice if some hon. Members on this side of the House were allowed to express their views?

Mr. Speaker

We are on business now. We are not arguing a point of principle or merit. It is a question of the arrangement of the business of the House, and customarily the Leader of the Opposition speaks for his own side on that matter to the Leader of the House.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. If there is to be a debate of one or two days on the Tribunal's findings we must not anticipate it now in the guise of questions on business. They are two quite separate things. Mr. Shinwell.

Mr. Shinwell

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman—

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order, order. I have called the right hon. Member for Easing-ton (Mr. Shinwell). If hon. Members have a complaint against my handling of this matter, they must take the proper course.

Mr. Shinwell

I merely want to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the debate on the Tribunal's Report will take place on a Government Motion.

Mr. Butler

Yes, Sir.

Mr. Shinwell

What will be the nature of the Motion?

Mr. Butler

We will table the Motion when we are ready, but, clearly, we shall wish to accept the Report.

Sir R. Jennings

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Would it not be possible, through you, to suggest to the Leader of the Opposition—

Hon. Members

No.

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Membes has not made an auspicious beginning with his point of order, but I think I ought to hear what it is before I express an opinion.

Sir R. Jennings

I should like to ask, through you, Sir, how it is possible to restrict speeches in this House, under the guise of Privilege, from making allegations against innocent people outside this House who have no possibility of defending themselves? If such statements were made outside this House the ultimate result would be in the courts of justice.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member has raised a very large question there, but the Privilege of this House is absolute. We rely upon hon. Members using that with a discretion which is appropriate on these occasions.

Mr. Dudley Williams

Further to that point of order, Sir. Right hon. and hon. Members of this House are rightly given a great degree of privilege, and it is absolutely monstrous if people blackguard others who have no opportunity to defend themselves.

Mr. Speaker

I have not heard anybody being blackguarded today. Mr. Soames.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. Major Legge-Bourke, on a point of order?

Major Legge-Bourke

It is not a point of order, Mr. Speaker, but I would like to ask a question.

Mr. Bevan rose—

Mr. Speaker

Does the right hon. Member rise to a point of order?

Major Legge-Bourke

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition has put a very serious question to the Leader of the House about the sacrifice by the Opposition of a Supply Day. Would it not be in order for one hon. Member from this side of the House to make a comment on that? It is only that that I wish to do. May I suggest that the sacrifice of a Supply Day means sacrificing the protection of the rights of the taxpayer?

Hon. Members

Oh.

Mr. Speaker

Order. The Supply Days are traditionally at the disposal of the Opposition. It is for the Opposition to choose what subjects they wish to discuss. Does the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) propose to rise to a point of order?

Mr. Bevan indicated dissent.

Mr. Peyton

On a point of order, Sir. I wish to put it to you that on the proposal which has been made by the Leader of the Opposition very few back bench Members have had any opportunity to comment. As one of those—

Mr. Speaker

That is not a question for debate. The last answer I heard from the Leader of the House was that he had just heard of this request before he came into the House, and that he would consider the suggestion through the usual channels. We cannot have every point of business farrangement debated on both sides of the House, or we should never get anywhere.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Short

Is it not a fact, Sir, that before this series of points of order started, my right hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) was on his feet asking a question?

Mr. Speaker

In answer to that point of order, the right hon. Gentleman is now seated.

Mr. Bevan rose—

Mr. Speaker

I hope that the House will cease consuming time with this matter. There is no Question for general debate before the House. We are discussing the business for next week. One day was allotted to Thursday's business and then there was a suggestion that there should be two days, which was modified into a suggestion that the second day might be provided by the Opposition. That is to be considered through the usual channels. The House is consuming time on this matter. We are long past the time for Questions and there is more to do before we can get to today's main debate. I must decline to hear any more on this matter.

Later—

Mr. P. Williams

On Monday's business—

Mr. Speaker

Order. We have passed from that.