HC Deb 30 January 1967 vol 740 cc24-7
36. Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

asked the Lord President of the Council what arrangements he is making for the use of the Strangers' Gallery during morning sittings of this honourable House.

Mr. Crossman

I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to the answers I gave to similar Questions on Monday, 23rd January.—[Vol. 739, cc. 967–969.]

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Does not one of those answers, with its reference to the hours which would have to be worked by doorkeepers, indicate that the Government expect that we shall not sit any less late at night by reason of sitting in the mornings? Is not the organisation of our business in a way that the Government think will not interest the public sufficiently to make them want to attend, bringing this House into contempt? Is that the object?

Mr. Crossman

It is not. I am prepared to explain briefly to the right hon. Gentleman the case for morning sittings. We are putting our less important business on two nights a week in two mornings, on the ground that this is of convenience to most Members of this House. Business varies in importance and popularity and we have put this business in the mornings.

Mr. Winnick

Has my right hon. Friend any idea why hon. Members opposite are opposed to morning sittings?

Mr. Crossman

I think the brief answer to that question is, "Yes".

Sir Knox Cunningham

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any approximate figure of the number of members of the public who come round the Chamber in the mornings? Does he realise that these morning sittings will mean cutting at least two mornings out of the four when the public can visit the Chamber and that these members of the public will want to go into the Gallery? What is h going to do about it?

Mr. Crossman

Of course, it is true that when we use our Chamber the public cannot walk through it, but we must regard the use of the Chamber by the House as the first priority. We are not just a museum. We are a live place. Therefore, when the hon. Gentleman says that I ought to be preoccupied with the thought that if we were not working here the public would be able to walk through and look at this place as a dead museum, I am not impressed.

Mr. Hogg

I do not think the right hon. Gentleman has understood the point of my hon. Friend's question. He was complaining of the closure of the Galleries during the public sittings of the House in the mornings, not of the filling of the Chamber.

Mr. Crossman

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman. A second question arises, and it is something on which the Services Committee, comprising people of all parties, are now reflecting. I believe that in the summer we may have a number of members of the public who would normally have walked through the House and who will request seats in the Gallery. In that case, of course, we must find room for them. They will come, however, not to walk through but to study and listen to our debates. They must, therefore, be treated as people who want to listen to the debates. For those we have made provision, and I repeat that if we have underestimated the demand, as I hope we have, we shall ensure that the public have adequate provision in the Gallery.

Sir Knox Cunningham

Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on an early occasion.

37. Mr. Maddan

asked the Lord President of the Council, with regard to admis- sion to the 155 seats in the Strangers' Gallery, whether he will invite the Services Committee to examine the present system whereby those given cards by high commissions and embassies, who can each give four cards a day, have priority over those in the public queue, with a view to arranging that only the first 20 people to present such cards will be given priority, others taking their place with the general public.

Mr. Crossman

The arrangements for admitting all categories of visitors to the Gallery involve a delicate balance between the space available and the many and conflicting demands. This balance has been reached after many years of experience, and it would be unwise to upset it.

Mr. Maddan

Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that a system that started in 1912 when there were fewer embassies and high commissions than there are now, is not necessarily the right system for the present time'? Furthermore, does he not agree that we should restrict the privilege of entry and of easy access to the Strangers' Gallery to the nationals of those countries which grant similar advantages to our nationals in their Parliaments?

Mr. Crossman

No, I would not agree. I think that the education of people in the practice of democracy should be offered to those who do not practise it as well as to those who do. I would have thought that we should not now cut down the facilities we are providing for embassies and high commissions, provided that we can ensure that the public have their fair share.

Mr. Hogg

Has not the right hon. Gentleman received from his own side of the House representations from Members with constituencies in London, about the immense shortage of tickets for members of the public who apply to their Members, who may be five or six months or more in arrear with their lists?

Mr. Crossman

Yes, I have indeed, but this does not affect morning sittings at all. It affects the fact that we have got—though it varies from debate to debate—increased public interest in listening to our debates.

Mr. Hogg

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that this question has nothing to do with morning sittings?

Mr. Crossman

If the right hon. and learned Gentleman is saying that in order to get more of the public in, we should cut out visitors from overseas, there is here a balance which has been established, and I should like a lot more evidence before I could agree to the right hon. and learned Gentleman's suggestion. I will certainly discuss this point with the Services Committee—an all-party Committee—to see whether we agree that there is a case for cutting back what we have available for people from overseas.