HC Deb 06 February 1969 vol 777 cc586-95
Mr. Heath

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 and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Fred Peart)

Yes, Sir. The business for next week will be as follows:

MONDAY, 10TH FEBRUARY.—Motion to appoint a Select Committee to Inquire into Statements Relating to Vehicle Excise Duty.

Second Reading of the Housing Bill.

TUESDAY, 11TH FEBRUARY.—Remaining stages of the Redundancy Rebates Bill and of Shipbuilding Industry Bill.

Motion on the Eggs (Protection of Guarantees) Order.

Motion on the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries.

WEDNESDAY, 12TH FEBRUARY.—Progress on the remaining stages of the Parliament (No. 2) Bill.

Thursday, 13th February.—Supply [9th Allotted Day]:

Debate on the Failure of the Compulsory Control of Incomes, which will arise on an Opposition Motion.

FRIDAY, 14TH FEBRUARY.—Private Members' Bills.

MONDAY, 17TH FEBRUARY.—Second Reading of the Family Law Reform Bill [Lords].

Mr. Heath

Can the Leader of the House now give the House an assurance that as it has not been possible to arrange it in the coming week, or the week after next, there will be a debate in Government time on the White Paper on industrial relations? This is a matter of great importance. Right hon. Gentlemen opposite have had time to discuss it among themselves. It is now time that we had a debate.

Mr. Peart

I am aware of the feelings of the right hon. Gentleman and other hon. Members on this matter, but I should like to consider this through the usual channels if I may.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

On Monday's business, if, as I could, I supplied the Leader of the House with a dozen and more cases in which rumours of leaks from various sources have been subsequently found to be well-founded, could we have a few Select Committees on these?

Mr. Speaker

Order. That is not a business question, but a point for the debate on Monday.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I was referring to Monday's business and suggesting that, in addition, we could perhaps have a few more Select Committees appointed to deal with various other leaks on which I could speak.

Mr. Peart

Not next week.

Mr. Turton

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen Motion No. 138, signed by 29 hon. Members of all parties?

[That this House notes with regret that no financial provision has been made for the widow of a loyal servant of the House of Commons who carried out the duties of train-bearer to three Speakers during the period of 28 years; and requests Her Majesty's Government to rectify this position.]

This reflects on the way in which the House treats the widows of former servants of the House and—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The right hon. Gentleman must not discuss the merits of his Motion.

Mr. Turton

Will the right hon. Gentleman afford an opportunity for a short debate on this matter either next week or in the near future?

Mr. Peart

I have looked carefully into this matter. I was sorry to see the Motion, which, I believe, is based on a misunderstanding. I invite those concerned about this matter to speak to me privately about it.

Mr. Wellbeloved

Will my right hon. Friend find time next week for a debate on the draft report of the Northumberland Committee, which has been prematurely disclosed? Is he aware that it is vitally important that the farmers' lobby should be counted in the House?

Mr. Peart

I have seen Press speculation on this matter only today, in, I believe, a farming newspaper. Ministers have not considered this matter. As the Minister who was responsible for setting up the Committee, I am anxious to see the report, but we are not ready.

Sir Harmar Nicholls

On the first business for Monday, which is a ludicrous inquiry, would it not save the time of the House and the reputation of Parliament if the matter were handed to the Ombudsman and the House were permitted to get down to something more important?

Mr. Peart

The hon. Member will have an opportunity when he sees the Motion.

Mr. William Hamilton

Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that we shall not have a debate on the Motion to set up a Committee on Scottish Affairs at the fag-end of a day's business next week? This is an extremely important matter.

Mr. Peart

I hope my hon. Friend does not regard Scotland as a fag-end of business.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Will the Leader of the House say when the debate which he has been promising for some weeks on the White Paper on industrial relations will take place?

Mr. Peart

I gave an answer to the Leader of the Opposition which I hoped would be acceptable.

Sir G. de Freitas

In view of increasing problems of water shortage in the East Midlands and in East Anglia, will my right hon. Friend consider the possibility of having a debate on the feasibility of a Wash barrage project?

Mr. Peart

I am aware of my right hon. Friend's interest in this matter. Whether or not to proceed with a feasibility study of the Wash barrage project is an important question, but I cannot find time for a debate next week.

Sir C. Taylor

As a Member of this honourable House, and speaking at the moment without any party affiliation—[Laughter.] Yes, on this matter—may I urge the Government not to debate on Monday on a Select Committee? I think that the whole House would agree that it is sad and outrageous if the House does not accept the word of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, of any party—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The latter half of what the hon. Member said is for the debate on Monday.

Sir C. Taylor

With the greatest respect, Sir, I am asking the Government to think again. Surely the appointment of a Select Committee is to take a sledgehammer to crack—[Laughter.]—a popular but publicity-minded nut.

Mr. Speaker

Order. Personalities do not help Parliament at all. The point which the hon. Gentleman has raised about the Committee is one for Monday's debate.

Mr. Mikardo

As the Motion to set up the Select Committee on the nationalised industries is essentially a House of Commons matter, one which does not involve any kind of party controversy, and one on which there are more likely to be differences between the back benchers on both sides and their Front Benches than between one Front Bench and another, will my right hon. Friend have consultations through the usual channels with a view to ensuring that there is a free vote on both sides on this issue?

Mr. Peart

I accept that the question of the appointment of the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries is one which cuts across all parties. Though I am not responsible for the whipping, I will consult.

Mr. Lubbock

Is the Leader of the House aware that there may be many hon. Members who will wish to speak in the debate on Monday on the Motion to appoint a Select Committee? [An HON. MEMBER: "I hope not."] I hope not, too, but the impression I gained from the questions addressed to the Leader of the House this afternoon was in the other sense. In view of this, will the right hon. Gentleman arrange for a suspension of the Standing Order on Monday evening so that we can be assured of having a full debate on the Housing Bill?

Mr. Peart

I will bear that in mind.

Mr. Mendelson

Will my right hon. Friend arrange a debate on foreign affairs, with particular reference to Britain's policy vis-à-vis the Common Market countries, before the Easter Recess, so that the House can examine what some hon. Members regard as a major shift in the Government's policy?

Mr. Peart

I will take careful note of what my hon. Friend has said and convey his view to the right quarters.

Mr. Burden

May I draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention to a letter which he wrote to me saying that, though there are many people both in the House and outside who are concerned about the Littlewood Report, no time can be found? This Report was published four years ago this April and the Government have done nothing but dodge having a debate.

Mr. Peart

I know that the hon. Gentleman has a great interest in this matter, but I cannot find time for a debate in the days ahead.

Mr. John Lee

Can we not, if not next week, at any rate in the near future, have a debate on the affairs of the Atomic Energy Authority, which the Government are in process of demolishing?

Mr. Peart

I will convey my hon. Friend's observation to my right hon. Friend, but, as my hon. Friend rightly said, no debate next week.

Mr. Peyton

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is the second week running that he has given a stalling answer on the question of a debate on the very important White Paper on industrial relations? The answer that the Leader of the House would prefer to discuss the question of a debate through the usual channels is, to put it very politely, totally unsatisfactory for most of us.

Mr. Peart

I would not have thought so. I like to see that my colleagues talk to the other side; I see nothing wrong in it. I thought that I was being helpful and constructive. I see the importance of having a debate, and I promise the hon. Gentleman that I am not stalling.

Mr. McNamara

Can my right hon. Friend say when we can have a debate on the fishing industry, in view of today's statement that the I.R.C. proposals seem to be falling down? These are very important for the success of the Government's policy.

Mr. Peart

I will convey my hon. Friend's view to the appropriate quarter, but no debate next week.

Mr. Biffen

Is the Leader of the House aware that the developing inter-union dispute in the steel industry makes a debate on the White Paper on industrial relations of paramount importance; and that it should take place next week? Will the right hon. Gentleman therefore reconsider the answer he gave to my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition?

Mr. Peart

I thought that I was being helpful.

Mr. Gwilym Roberts

My right hon. Friend will undoubtedly have noticed with concern the thwarting of the important Luton Corporation Bill? Will he let the House have an early debate on this issue?

Mr. Peart

I know the feeling of many hon. Members on this issue. I will carefully consider the matter.

Mr. St. John-Stevas

Does the Leader of the House realise that his conviction that he is being helpful is not much help to those who urgently want a debate on industrial relations? Is it not a wrong sense of priorities that the Government can find time for a trivial debate on Monday but cannot find time this week or next for a debate on the vital subject of industrial relations?

Mr. Peart

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not continue to think that next week's business is trivial. It is very important. I am trying to help, but I do not want to repeat what I said earlier.

Mr. Garrett

Is there any possibility of my right hon. Friend's providing time for a debate on the question of the different rates of public expenditure as between England and Scotland?

Mr. Peart

There is no time in the programme that I have announced. I will convey my hon. Friend's point to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland.

Dame Irene Ward

What excuse is there for not having a debate on the Littlewood Report? Many people are urgently awaiting this debate. We want to know why the right hon. Gentleman has not allotted time—not just that he has not, because we know that.

Mr. Peart

I will sympathetically consider the hon. Lady's point of view, but there is no time in the days ahead.

Mr. Whitaker

Can time be found before long for a short debate on the question of the British subjects detained in China, who are a matter of concern to hon. Members in all parts of the House?

Mr. Peart

I agree that this is a very serious and important matter, but no debate next week.

Mr. Hastings

Is the Leader of the House aware that his answer on the question of the Government's proposals for improving industrial relations are not only unhelpful but totally unsatisfactory to many of us on this side? Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that there will be a debate on this matter in Government time at the earliest opportunity—next week, if possible?

Mr. Peart

I said that I was aware of the important point made by the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition. I would only be repeating myself if I went further. I am trying to be helpful.

Mr. Hector Hughes

Will the Leader of the House at last relent and provide time for a debate on the Motion about the unemployment caused by the closure of the locomotive works at Inverurie and other unemployment in Scotland?

[That this House, recognising the devastating effect which closure of the Inverurie Locomotive Works would have upon the inhabitants of Inverurie, and upon the economy of the Royal Burgh and the north-east of Scotland, calls upon the Government to give an assurance that it will intervene to prevent any closure unless alternative employment is available in the area for the work force, and an alternative function for the factory itself.]

Mr. Peart

I will convey that point to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, but no debate next week.

Mr. Eldon Griffiths

Has the Leader of the House considered that it might be possible on Monday to conclude the debate on the Motion to appoint the Select Committee by 7.30 p.m.? Would it be possible to slide in behind my hon. Friend the Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro) a discussion on a minor question like the Middle East, for example?

Mr. Peart

No. I hope that we shall have only a short debate on Monday on the Motion.

Mr. Ronald Atkins

Will my right hon. Friend find time for a debate on Motion 123, which is signed by 51 of my hon. Friends and which deals with the urgent matter of railway closures?

[That this House, bearing in mind the importance of a railway network adequate to the social and economic needs of the country, calls on Her Majesty's Government to make public the financial formulae used by the Minister of Transport to justify the closure of railway lines and to evaluate social subsidies where granted.]

Mr. Peart

I will convey my hon. Friend's point to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport. Cases vary.

Mr. W. Baxter

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is considerable concern among Scottish Members and the Scottish public at large about the leakage of the membership of this supposed-to-be Select Committee on Scottish Affairs? Will my right hon. Friend make a statement about the leakage and also tell us that we can have a debate on this urgently?

Mr. Peart

I said that I would refer to this today. I have not done so. There has been speculation in the Press. I hope that hon. Members will wait for a Motion and the names.

Mr. Molloy

In view of certain Ministerial statements about European policy and the Prime Minister's intended visit to Bonn, should there not be an immediate debate on European affairs so that we can consider whether there are to be any other moves towards joining the Common Market?

Mr. Peart

My hon. Friend will have heard my earlier reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone (Mr. Mendel-son). I will convey my hon. Friend's concern to the appropriate quarter.

Mr. Doughty

Will the Leader of the House arrange for a debate next week on the question of British Summer Time in winter time, so that legislation may be introduced to bring the present undesirable arrangement to an end?

Mr. Peart

I know that many hon. Members feel strongly about that, but not next week.

Mr. Tomney

Will my right hon. Friend ask the Cabinet to follow the advice of my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) who said this week that the best thing to do about next Monday's debate is to lay the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro) upon the Table—and preferably in a limp condition?

Mr. Speaker

Order. That is not a serious business question.

Sir Harmar Nicholls

If the Government insist on proceeding with the nonsensical inquiry which is to be the subject of Monday's debate, ought they not to announce the terms of the Motion which they intend to pursue?

Mr. Speaker

Order. I assume that the Motion will be put on the Order Paper at the appropriate time.

Later—

Mr. Wellbeloved

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I seek your guidance? During business questions, I ask my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House whether he would find time next week to debate the premature leak of the Northumberland Committee's Report. He declined to do so and said that the Report was not yet in the hands of the Minister who had himself set up the Committee.

As the Report, now public knowledge, has been published in this week's issue of the Farmer and Stockbreeder, and is now the subject of considerable debate outside the House, and, moreover, as the vice-president of the National Farmers' Union, Mr. Henry Plumb, a member of the Committee, has on several occasions made statements which obviously show that he entered into the work of the Committee with a prejudiced and biased view—

Hon. Members

No.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman is addressing me on a point of order, not on the merits of the Report or of the vice-president of the N.F.U.

Mr. Wellbeloved

I am coming to the point of order, Sir.

As those things have taken place, and the Report has been published, my point of order is this. Will it be in order for me to ask leave to seek an early opportunity of raising this matter on the Adjournment, due to the unsatisfactory nature of my right hon. Friend's reply?

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman could have given the notice which he gave in his last half-sentence without all the preliminary matter.