HC Deb 16 November 1967 vol 754 cc647-9
Mr. Palmer

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, after having given you due notice, under the new Standing Order, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter, namely, the organised attempt of the Westinghouse Electrical Company of America, now being made, to recruit to its service senior British scientists and engineers employed on the development of the fast breeder nuclear reactor of the Atomic Energy Authority at Dounreay, an attempt which, if successful, would gravely hinder the technological progress already achieved and be greatly to the advantage of the American company, which is among this country's principal rivals in the nuclear export field.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member asks leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter which he thinks should have urgent consideration, namely, the organised attempt of the Westinghouse Electrical Company of America, now being made, to recruit to its service senior British scientists and engineers employed on the development of the fast breeder nuclear reactor of the Atomic Energy Authority at Dounreay, an attempt which, if successful, would gravely hinder the technological progress already achieved and be greatly to the advantage of the American company, which is among this country's principal rivals in the nuclear export field. As the House will be aware, this is the first occasion on which I have been required to give my Ruling under the revised Standing Order No. 9. It was only last Tuesday, 14th November, that the new conditions were agreed to by the House. Under the new rules, which regulate the approach of Mr. Speaker to these difficult problems as much as they do in the case of every other Member, the terms of the Order are different. What used to be a definite matter of urgent public importance now becomes: a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration". Before satisfying myself that the matter is proper to be discussed on that ground or not proper, I have virtually set aside many previous precedents, and rule in the light of these new conditions.

On the other hand, the provisions of the new Order prescribe that a Member proposing to move the Adjournment of the House should give notice by 12 o'clock if the urgency of the matter is known at that hour, and I am grateful to the hon. Member for having complied with that condition, so that I have had some time to reflect before giving my decision this afternoon.

The House will also remember, however, that, under the revised Standing Order, Mr. Speaker is directed not to give any reason for his decision. I therefore would ask the House to realise that my decision this afternoon has been reached after full consideration of all that is involved in the hon. Member's application.

I must now rule that the hon. Member's submission does not fall within the provisions of the revised Standing Order and, therefore, I cannot submit its application to the House.

Dr. David Kerr

Further to that point of order. I would ask you for your guidance, Mr. Speaker, on one matter to which you referred in making your statement, which I accept. That was your reference to your exclusion of "many" of the precedents which had been set under the old Standing Order No. 9. I need not remind the House that the deliberations of the Select Committee on Procedure tried to exclude all the precedents which had restricted debates of this kind. It might be helpful if you could state whether any precedents still remain which you feel bound to consider in reaching a decision under the new Standing Order.

Mr. Speaker

I do not believe that it is wise to make any comment whatever. The view of the House was that any reasons would become, in themselves, precedents. This is a danger which, I gather, having studied the debate and the Report of the Select Committee on Procedure—and having given evidence to it —the House wishes to avoid, so I make no comment.

Mr. Palmer

May I be allowed to say that I am very grateful to you, Mr. Speaker, for your consideration of this matter? However, have you taken into consideration the very urgent letter which was addressed by the Minister of Technology yesterday to the scientists and engineers concerned?

Mr. Speaker

I assure the House and the hon. Gentleman that when I said that I had given consideration to this I had indeed given full consideration.

Forward to