HC Deb 08 July 1965 vol 715 cc1825-32
Sir Alec Douglas-Home

May I ask the Leader of the House whether he will state the business of the House for next week?

The Lord President of the Council (Mr. Herbert Bowden)

Yes, Sir. It now seems likely that further time on the Report stage of the Finance (No. 2) Bill will be necessary. Thus, the Business for next week will be as follows:

MONDAY, 12TH JULY—Report stage of the Finance (No. 2) Bill.

TUESDAY, 13TH JULY—Private Members' Motions until seven o'clock.

Afterwards, completion of the remaining stages of the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Bill.

WEDNESDAY, 14TH JULY—Supply [21st Allotted Day]: Committee.

There will be a debate on Technology, which will arise on the appropriate Vote.

Second Reading of the Judges Remuneration Bill.

THURSDAY, 15TH JULY—Third Reading of the Finance (No. 2) Bill.

Consideration of Lords Amendments to the Control of Office and Industrial Development Bill.

FRIDAY, 16TH JULY—Remaining stages of the Race Relations Bill, and of the Severn Bridge Tolls Bill.

MONDAY, 19TH JULY—The proposed business will be Supply [22nd Allotted Day]: Committee.

Subject to progress of business, there will be a debate on Foreign Affairs, which will be brought to a conclusion on TUESDAY, 20TH JULY.

Sir Alec Douglas-Home

Is the Leader of the House aware that before the House can accept any authoritative Business statement from him we must know what the Government intend to do about their humiliating defeats on the Report stage of the Finance Bill? Is he aware that at no time in the last 40 years have a Government been defeated on a Finance Bill? Can he say, in particular, what the Government intend to do about the new Clause and whether they intend to accept the decision of the House and give relief to small savers?

Mr. Bowden

I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman is quite correct. I seem to recall that in 1955 the Government of the day lost the whole Bill and that it had to be restored next day. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] On the question of what happened on the Report stage of the Bill the other night, the Clause was added to the Bill. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I do not know why right hon. Gentlemen should be so elated about this. There was a defeat for the Government on that occasion. I think that there was also a defeat for right hon. Gentlemen.

Mr. Delargy

Will my right hon. Friend find time for a discussion on a Motion which has appeared on the Order Paper today concerning Division bells in private houses?

[That this House do prohibit the ringing of Division bells in private houses, flats and clubs.]

Mr. Bowden

I am not really quite sure what is required here, but if it is felt that Division bells ought not to be sited in flats and clubs the House would have to have that matter looked at by an appropriate Committee. There is no reason why the Select Committee on Procedure should not look at it. If the point is whether the cost of Division bells in private houses and clubs is adequately covered by whatever rental is paid, that is a rather different matter.

Mr. Turton

Could the right hon. Gentleman make quite clear whether he accepts the decision of the House on the Clause to help small savers or whether he intends to correct this, or attempt to correct it, by recommitting the Finance Bill to a further stage?

Mr. Bowden

No. I cannot go beyond what I have already said, that the Clause has been added to the Bill.

Mrs. McKay

May I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to Motion No. 259 in the name of my hon. Friends and myself asking for a free pardon for Michael John Davies? Will my right hon. Friend find time for an early debate on this Motion?

[That, in view of all the circumstances as they have now been revealed, and the unsatisfactory nature of the evidence for the prosecution, some of which have been recently reviewed in a book entitled, The Plough Boy, this House is of opinion that a free pardon should be granted to Michael John Davies, who was wrongly convicted of murder, sentenced to death and subsequently reprieved.]

Mr. Bowden

No. I cannot promise time for a debate between now and the Summer Recess, unless my hon. Friend should be fortunate enough to get a half-hour Adjournment or an Adjournment on the Motion for the Summer Recess.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us when the promised White Paper on land policy will be available, in view of the indications being given that local authority officers are to be informed of the Government's policy in this respect on the 20th of this month? Can he also give an assurance that there will be no question of presenting a White Paper on this highly controversial subject without the provision of an early opportunity for a debate?

Mr. Bowden

I cannot at this stage give the right hon. Gentleman the date for the publication of a White Paper.

Captain Orr

Can the Leader of the House tell us when we may expect the second half-day's debate on Northern Ireland?

Mr. Bowden

I hope this Session.

Mr. Sydney Silverman

I appreciate and express my gratitude to the Leader of the House for his helpfulness in finding time on Tuesday for the remaining stages of the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Bill. In what I hope is the unlikely event of there not being sufficient time by ten o'clock to dispose of all the remaining stages, will extra time be afforded that night to enable us to finish the Bill?

Mr. Bowden

I think that we had better take the precaution of suspending the rule that night.

Mr. Hugh Fraser

What plans has the Leader of the House now for the debate on the Supplementary Estimates, of which there are 23, totalling £27 million? May I remind him that not so long ago the House sat until September getting these through? These are vital matters. I am sure that the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Maxwell) will agree with me that these matters must be debated.

Mr. Bowden

I agree that these things should be debated, but the right hon. Gentleman will recall that Supply is a matter for the Opposition. It is for them to decide whether they select Supplementary Estimates for debate on any of the remaining five Supply days or on Guillotine days as they wish.

Mr. H. Fraser

Surely the right hon. Gentleman must agree that, whatever the procedures of the House, it is a very serious matter that £27 million of taxpayers' money is in danger of not being debated. What is the right hon. Gentleman going to do about it?

Mr. Bowden

I can recall Supplementary Estimates of £60 million not being debated. There again, it was a matter for the choice of the Opposition of the day.

Mr. Maxwell

Will my right hon. Friend find time for early debates on unit trusts and their relation to business in this House, having in mind recent Press reports—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."] I want to be very careful as well as being very accurate, if hon. and right hon. Members will allow me. Will by right hon. Friend find time for an early debate after those Press reports that the right hon. Member for Bexley (Mr. Heath) was acting under the instruction of the hon. Member for Taunton (Mr. du Cann), the Chairman of the Tory Party, when he carried out the putsch against the Finance Bill closure?

Mr. Speaker

Order. That seems to go rather far from a supplementary question to a business question in so far as I have heard it. If the hon. Member wishes to ask a business question, will he be good enough to do so?

Mr. Maxwell

My question stands, Sir. Will the Leader of the House find time for an early debate on unit trusts in relation to the business of the House?

Mr. Bowden

Not between now and the Summer Recess.

Mr. Frederic Harris

In view of the implications and effects on the staff of the Palace of Westminster of the continual late-night sittings and all-night sittings, will the Leader of the House think about making a considered statement about this or having a debate in the near future?

Mr. Bowden

We shall be having a debate on the whole question of the control of the Palace of Westminster when the Report comes from the Select Committee. That will not be for a week or two. I, too, am disturbed about the effect on the staff of all-night sittings and I hope that the whole House is. Because of that, I have had an extra day's debate arranged for Monday which should be adequate to complete the Report stage of the Finance Bill, and with a little good will on both sides by sitting till midnight tonight and on Monday I hope that we shall completely finish it.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

In view of the fact that the Opposition consistently complain about unnecessary and wasteful Government expenditure, may I ask why my right hon. Friend has put down the Second Reading of the Judges' Remuneration Bill as a second Order of the Day? In view of the fact that many of my hon. Friends are very much opposed to this public expenditure, will my right hon. Friend take notice that some of us will want adequate time to discuss the Bill and probably to put forward good ideas which the Government might accept?

Mr. Bowden

This, of course, is a Government Measure. I think that there is adequate time during which hon. and right hon. Members on both sides of the House can put their views.

Sir H. Butcher

Further to the question asked by the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis), may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, having regard to the fact that judges' remuneration cannot be considered in isolation but must be considered as part of Government policy, consideration of the Bill will be entered upon at an appropriate hour and not late at night?

Mr. Bowden

I have already stated the hour at which it is proposed to take that Bill.

Mr. Rankin

Could my right hon. Friend find time, before the end of this part of the Session, to discuss the need for televising the proceedings of the House? Does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is important that the public should see for themselves how badly the Tory Party behaves in a national emergency?

Mr. Speaker

Order. I wish we could get rid of that sort of thing in business questions. It does not assist the progress of business. I do not know whether the Leader of the House wishes to answer the material part of that question.

Mr. Bowden

I would simply say that we had a debate on televising Parliament two months ago and that the matter is now before a Select Committee.

Sir C. Taylor

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member for Eastbourne (Sir C. Taylor) has a point of order?

Sir C. Taylor

May I ask a question and not a point of order?

Mr. Speaker

That is a different proposition.

Mr. Gibson-Watt

Which day has the Leader of the House chosen for a debate on Welsh Affairs on the Floor of the House? It is always normal to have this debate before the House rises for the Summer Recess.

Mr. Bowden

Certainly not next week. I will announce it on the Thursday of the week before the week in which it takes place.

Mr. Popplewell

Will my right hon. Friend consider amending the Standing Orders, and if so, when, to allow sick Members to vote by proxy?

Mr. Bowden

This is not proving to be quite such a simple problem as we thought, but discussion has taken place through the usual channels. There would be some advantage in the Select Committee on Procedure looking at the question whether or not we could apply proxy voting to hon. and right hon. Members who are sick and unable to attend. At present, Members who are sick but attend the House and are unable to go through the Division Lobbies are nodded through.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. We must move on.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

On a point of order. May I raise with you, Mr. Speaker, a point of order? I wish to seek your advice on Motion No. 293, on today's Order Paper.

[That this House, recalling the historic words of Sir Winston Churchill that "The Conservative Party is not a party but a conspiracy", his assertion that it stood for "the great vested interests banded together in a formidable federation; corruption at home, aggression to cover it up abroad, the trickery of tariff juggles, the tyranny of a party machine, sentiment by the bucketful, patriotism by the imperial pint, the open hand at the public exchequer, the open door at the public house, dear food for the million, cheap labour for the millionaire" and his warning that "the Conservative Party is nothing less than a deliberate attempt on the part of important sections of the propertied classes to transfer their burdens to the shoulders of the masses of the people and to gain greater profits for the investment of their capital by charging higher prices", notes that in the debates on the Finance Bill the Conservative Party has continued its traditional role.]

Mr. Speaker

Would it be convenient for the hon. Member to seek advice in private? It would save the time of the House.

Mr. Lewis

With great respect, Mr. Speaker, until you have heard the point of order, how can you say whether or not it is a point of order?

Mr. Speaker

I am not saying that it is not a point of order. I am just suggesting that if the hon. Member wants my advice I should be delighted to give it to him when I can, and if it need not be in public it will save time.

Mr. Lewis

I want to raise a point of order, Sir. I want to ask whether it is in order for that Motion to be placed on the Order Paper in view of your Ruling yesterday on a prima facie case of breach of privilege. I know that I cannot refer to that actual case, but here we have an hon. Member who has accused hon. Members opposite of trickery, of looking after their own vested interests, and of corruption. If that other matter, which I will not detail, was a prima facie breach of privilege, then surely for an hon. Member to put on the Order Paper a Motion accusing every hon. Member opposite of trickery, corruption, and various other matters expressed in epithets which I cannot read out in full, is something which is either out of order or should be referred to the Committee of Privileges.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member may take it that the Motion is only on the Order Paper because it is in order. No other point arises. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

On a point of order. In view of the fact that I am responsible for this Motion, may I point out that I have not accused hon. Members of anything. I have merely quoted the historic words of Sir Winston Churchill.

Mr. Speaker

That greatly confirms my view that the Clerk should now proceed to read the Orders of the Day.