HC Deb 30 May 1968 vol 765 cc2171-5
Mr. Biggs-Davison

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely, the vote cast in the United Nations Security Council by the British representative in favour of a Resolution imposing even harsher mandatory sanctions on Rhodesia and, in particular, the new and dangerous situation arising from the call contained in that Resolution to all members of the United Nations to render moral and material assistance to the people of Southern Rhodesia in their struggle for freedom and independence. I submit that the statement that we have had from the Commonwealth Secretary indicates that this is a specific matter; and some of us at least have had access to an official text of the Resolution. How can its importance be denied?

The importance of the matter was shown by the feeling that ran so high when the Commonwealth Secretary made his statement and by the feeling that we all experience in our constituencies, which is more sympathetic to our side of the House than to the other—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman must not drift into the merits of what he is asking the House to debate.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

As matters stand, the House separates tomorrow for Whitsun. Today, we have heard nothing but lame and fuzzy interpretations of these ominous and dangerous words concerning the struggle in Rhodesia.

The urgency of the matter arises from the fact that, at this very moment, terrorism and guerrilla activity is going on in the Zambesi Valley, and, even if right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite claim that there is no connection between that and the words "moral and material assistance", contained in that Resolution—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman must not seek to argue the subject that he will argue if he gets his Standing Order No. 9 Adjournment.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

The criterion to which I seek to address myself is the urgency of the matter. The urgency arises from the fact that the situation is now being worsened by this Resolution, especially by the words to which I have referred. Whatever interpretation is put on them from the Treasury Bench, they will be interpreted as an incitement to bloodshed and an encouragement to a breakdown of law and order, which the Government have always professed to defend in a country for which they claim to be responsible.

This is a new departure, and the consequences are likely to be appalling to Africans of all races and to all those whom we represent. I submit that we as a House would be deficient in our duty to our constituents if we did not seek to discuss, possibly this evening, a disastrous new course entered upon in the name of international peace and security but calculated to lead to massacre, anarchy and war.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member for Chigwell (Mr. Biggs-Davison) asks leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that he thinks should have urgent consideration, namely, the vote cast in the United Nations Security Council by the British representative in favour of a Resolution imposing even harsher mandatory sanctions on Rhodesia and, in particular, the new and dangerous situation arising from the call contained in that Resolution to all members of the United Nations to render moral and material assistance to the people of Southern Rhodesia in their struggle for freedom and independence. The House will remember that, under the revised Standing Order No. 9, agreed to on 14th November, 1967, Mr. Speaker is directed to take into account the several factors set out in the Order, but to give no reasons for his decision.

In the light of the new conditions, I have to rule that the hon. Gentleman's submission does not fall within the provisions of the revised Standing Order, and, therefore, I cannot submit his application to the House.

Sir Knox Cunningham

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Without in any way wishing to challenge what you have said, may I raise this point with you? Tomorrow, we adjourn for the Recess. Tomorrow is a Friday, when we shall have Adjournment debates. Under the new procedure, is it ever possible to have a Standing Order No. 9 Adjournment on the penultimate day, in those circumstances?

Mr. Speaker

The simple answer is that it is possible under Standing Order No. 9 to have a Standing Order debate on a penultimate day. If the hon. and learned Gentleman reads the Standing Order which governs it, he will see that there are two kinds of debates possible. The first is one of extreme urgency, which is given that very day, whereas the normal procedure will be to give it for the next day.