HC Deb 15 October 1969 vol 788 cc410-2
Mr. John Mendelson

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 failure of Her Majesty's Government to dissociate themselves from the policy and actions of the United States Government in Vietnam, in spite of the demands of the trade union labour movement and large sections of public opinion in this country, and the need to urge upon the United States Government a more speedy withdrawal of United States forces in line with the request put forward by the historic moratorium movement in America. My first point, which I believe to be decisive, as to why this matter is urgent is this. The President of the United States, Mr. Nixon, was heard on B.B.C. radio yesterday morning, and again at one o'clock yesterday, to say that, in his opinion, in view of the measures which he has initiated in the last 12 months, he now has world opinion, and particularly Western opinion, completely behind him. This is riot so. Many members of the United States Congress are demanding a change of policy, and the President is using alleged reports of public opinion in this country and others as an argument against them. That makes the matter urgent, and a debate therefore brooks no delay.

The second point which I wish to advance without going into the burden of the arguments which could arise only if a debate were granted is this. There are situations in which the formation of policy can be influenced by Parliament and, as I understand, the change in the Order was deliberately intended to facilitate debate in the House at a time when policy may still be influenced. We are a Co-Chairman of the Geneva Conference. The discussions in Paris are, to some extent, a substitute for the recall of that conference. We have a direct responsibility, and if Parliament is to have an opportunity to urge a change of course and intervention in this critical situation when the negotiations have broken down it must be done now.

Thirdly, there are famous historic precedents for this Motion—and this is the only other point I wish to make. [An HON. MEMBER: "Why?"] Because I believe, with other hon. Members, that we must not abuse the courtesy of the House and the tolerance of Mr. Speaker, but must make the point as quickly and briefly as possible. I have listened to hon. Members on both sides who have tried to do the same. I have afforded them my respect and I expect to have the respect of my colleagues on such an occasion.

This matter has famous historic precedent. More than 100 years ago the President of the Confederacy, Mr. Jefferson Davis, claimed to have the support of public opinion in the United Kingdom behind the Confederacy. The working people of Manchester and of other parts of this country took action to prove him wrong and the opinion of those people—and their equivalent today is the trade union and labour movements who have expressed their views on this matter—was voiced and reflected in this House. I urge that the House should be given the same opportunity this afternoon.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman the Member for Penistone (Mr. John Mendelson) was courteous enough to inform me that he would seek to obtain a Standing Order No. 9 debate on the matter he has raised.

The hon. Gentleman 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 failure of Her Majesty's Government to dissociate themselves from the policy and actions of the United States Government in Vietnam, in spite of the demands of the trade union labour movement and large sections of public opinion in this country, and the need to urge upon the United States Government a more speedy withdrawal of United States forces in line with the request put forward by the historic moratorium movement in America". As the House knows, under the revised Standing Order I am directed to take into account the several factors set out in the Order but to give no reason for my decision.

I have given careful consideration to the representation which the hon. Gentleman has made, but I have to rule that his submission does not fall within the provisions of the revised Standing Order, and, therefore, I cannot submit his application to the House.