BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (Hansard, 12 March 1959)

§ Mr. Gaitskell
May I ask the Leader of the House whether he will state 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, 16TH MARCH—A debate will take place on the Anglo-Egyptian Financial Agreement, on a Government Motion.
TUESDAY, 17TH MARCH—Supply [9th Allotted Day]: Report.
Consideration of the Civil Supplementary Estimate on Roads etc., England and Wales, Class IX, Vote 2.
The necessary Questions on the Supply Votes required before the end of the financial year would be put from the Chair at 9.30 p.m. under the provisions of Standing Order No. 16, but in view of the fact that opposed Private Business has been set down for consideration by the Chairman of Ways and Means we propose to ask the house to agree to the Questions being put on the necessary Supply Business at 7 o'clock.
Consideration of the Central Land Board (Dissolution and Transfer of Functions) Order.
WEDNESDAY, 18TH MARCH—Second Reading of the Consolidated Fund Bill, which it is proposed to take formally.
A debate will then take place on an Opposition Motion relating to Unemployment.
Consideration of the Import Duties (Temporary Exemptions) (No. 2) Order; and the National Insurance (Earnings) Regulations.
THURSDAY, 19TH MARCH—It is proposed to take the Committee and remaining stages of the Consolidated Fund Bill formally. Afterwards, a debate will take place on Cyprus, which will arise on a Government Motion.
1458 Committee and remaining stages of the following consolidation Measures: County Courts Bill [Lords], and the Overseas Resources Development Bill [Lords].
FRIDAY, 20TH MARCH—Consideration of private Members' Motions.

§ Mr. Janner
Has the Lord Privy Seal considered a Motion on the Order Paper in the name of 290 hon. Members of the House, including myself, and which is backed by a considerable number of other hon. Members who, for certain reasons, are unable to put their names to a Motion of this sort, as the right hon. Gentleman is aware? Will the right hon. Gentleman give time for the Motion to be debated in the very near future?

§ Mr. Butler
I do not think that there will be time to consider the Motion before Easter, so I cannot give any further reply.

§ Mr. Janner
But is not the right hon. Gentleman flouting the wishes of the majority of the Members of the House by not giving time to debate the Motion and trying to stop these murderous instruments from being used? Is he aware that unless my Bill goes through—I was about to say without a foolish intervention by some Member or other when it comes before the House on Friday next—the murders and crimes of violence which have been taking place almost daily as a result of the use of these instruments will continue? Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider his decision?

§ Mr. Butler
No, Sir. I do not think that it is usual, when an hon. Member has a Bill before the House, to intervene in this way by providing Parliamentary time. I cannot make any observation on the fortune or good fortune which may attend the hon. Member's Bill. The Motion does not enable me to provide Parliamentary time for a subject which is to be discussed on a Private Member's Bill.

§ Mr. Janner
Whether it is usual or not, it is very unusual for 290 Members to put their names to a Motion that they desire to be dealt with. Surely that calls for an unusual reaction.

§ Mr. Butler
The hon. Member was fortunate in having the opportunity to present a Private Member's Bill. It is well known that that Bill has not yet been decided by the House. Therefore, we must, first, let the Bill take its course.

§ Mr. H. Morrison
In view of the number of incidents which have arisen from the use of these nasty weapons, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that there is a responsibility on the Government, if necessary, to introduce legislation? Is not the argument that it is administratively difficult a little bit thin, considering the grave danger to the community which the use of these weapons involves?

§ Mr. Butler
I had observed that the name of the right hon. Member for Lewisham, South (Mr. H. Morrison) was among those supporting the Motion. As he is an ex-Home Secretary, with great experience of these matters, I have, naturally, paid all the more attention to the support given to the hon. Member for Leicester, North-West (Mr. Janner). But that does not detract from my answer that the hon. Member's Bill must take its course.

§ Dame Irene Ward
As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will in a very short time go to America and, therefore, it is unlikely that time will be found to debate the Motion standing in my name on the order obtained by Messrs. C. A. Parsons and the growing opposition in America to the order, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he will convey to the Prime Minister the terms of the Motion so that representations may be made at the highest possible level on the recommendation of the confirmation of the order?

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Lady's Question does not arise on the business for next week.

§ Dame Irene Ward
On a point of order. Is it not usual to be allowed to draw attention to the terms of a Motion? [An HON. MEMBER: "No."] Yes, certainly.

§ Mr. Speaker
We are now dealing with the business for next week. It is permissible for hon. Members to ask whether a certain Motion is coming on. I did not understand the hon. Lady to ask about the business for next week. I understood her to ask the Lord Privy Seal to convey a message to the Prime Minister. That is not relevant to the business for next week.

§ Dame Irene Ward
I should be delighted to ask whether we can debate the Motion next week, Mr. Speaker. May I therefore ask my right hon. Friend whether he can find time for it?

§ Mr. Butler
The answer, in short, is, "No, Sir." The answer to the unallowed question is, "Yes, Sir."

§ Mr. S. Silverman
May I revert to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, North-West (Mr. Janner) and remind the Leader of the House that there is a precedent for the procedure which my hon. Friend pressed upon him? In the days when there was a Private Member's Bill for the abolition of the death penalty, and it was desired by a large number of hon. Members that time should be provided to discuss it, the same procedure was followed as that which has been followed by my hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, North-West.
A large number of hon. Members on both sides of the House tabled a Motion asking that time should be found for a Second Reading. Although the Government on that occasion did not find time for Second Reading, they found time for the subject to be discussed on a Motion of their own. Could not that procedure be followed on this Motion?

§ Mr. Butler
No, Sir. I regret that I cannot accept the hon. Member's suggestion. The hon. Member for Leicester, North-West has had the opportunity to present a Private Member's Bill and I think that we should let the Bill take its course.