BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (Hansard, 28 January 1970)

§ Sir Harmar Nicholls
On a point of order. How can a question be asked, Mr. Speaker, when a point of order has been raised by the hon. Member who wanted to apologise?

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The Chair is aware at all times that after Question 1550 Time is over hon. Members are so enthusiastic that they want to put questions. I noticed that the hon. Member wanted to put a question, but it was half a minute past half-past three.

§ Mr. Peart
With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a short Business statement.
The business tomorrow has been rearranged as follows:
Until seven o'clock, Supply [8th Allotted day] (First Part), when there will be a debate on an Opposition Motion relating to Housing.
Afterwards, as already announced, the Chairman of Ways and Means has named opposed Private Business for consideration.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Only one hon. Member may address the House at one time.

§ Mr. Arthur Lewis
Can the Leader of the House say whether he feels, since on a Thursday the Orders of the Day are usually not reached until ten minutes past four, there will be adequate time for the debate on housing, considering that both Front Benches will take part in it? Will there be adequate time for back benchers? After all, this matter does affect hon. Members with constituency interests. About an hour will be split between the two Front Benches. Does my right hon. Friend consider that this will be a fair and reasonable debate? Could we not have a whole day for it?

§ Sir W. Bromley-Davenport
Further to that point of order—

Hon. Members
Sit down!

§ Sir W. Bromley-Davenport
Shut up!

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Member for Knutsford (Sir W. Bromley-Davenport) must behave himself.

§ Mr. Peart
In reply to my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis), I agree with him that it is important that back benchers should have opportunities in the debate, but it is not for me to decide this. I would hope that 1551 the Front Bench speeches will be short and precise.

§ Sir W. Bromley-Davenport
On a point of explanation, Mr. Speaker—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Point of explanation is an animal I do not recognise.

§ Sir W. Bromley-Davenport
Further to that point of order. I am extremely sorry, Mr. Speaker, if I did something, or if I am doing something, not in order, but I am deaf. I am extremely sorry.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The House always accepts apologies in the spirit in which they are offered, and I do, wholeheartedly.

§ Mr. Hugh Jenkins
Can my right hon. Friend say when the Films Bill, displaced by the change of business tomorrow, will be debated? Will it be in the early part of next week?

§ Mr. Peart
I will make an announcement tomorrow about this.

§ Sir Harmar Nicholls
In supporting the point made by the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) about the lack of time for the housing debate tomorrow, may I ask, why could not the Government have found time for this most important subject? Why did they wait for the Opposition to have this vital subject debated in the House? Cannot even now another half a day, making a full day, be found out of Government time for this matter to be examined in detail?

§ Mr. Peart
The hon. Member has been in the House a long time and he knows that the Opposition, quite rightly, takes the initiative on these Supply Days. We have this half day's debate. Let us proceed with it in the normal way.

§ Sir A. V. Harvey
In view of the short time for this very important debate tomorrow will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that the Prime Minister, on his return, will not give us a longwinded statement about his visit to America?

§ Mr. Peart
That is another matter.

§ Mr. Bagier
Will my right hon. Friend take serious note of the point made by the hon. Member for Peterborough (Sir 1552 Harmar Nicholls)? Could we not have a full day to debate the question of housing? Many of us would like to examine in depth many of the reasons why the Tory-controlled councils have cut back on their housing. This lack of time limits the possibility of debating that. We also should like to examine in some depth whether this cutback by Conservative councils is a policy coordinated between the Tory councils and the Conservative Central Office, but opportunity to examine that tomorrow will be denied us because of the shortness of the debate.

§ Mr. Peart
I have announced the business. Quite rightly, under Standing Order No. 18 the Opposition have the initiative in the matter for debate and we are to have this half day's debate.

§ Mr. Maudling
I think that the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Sir A. V. Harvey) is very important. Without wanting to particularise, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman, as Leader of the House, will ensure that the business is so arranged that there is the maximum time available for the debate of housing?

§ Mr. Peart
I hope so, but, obviously, if the House wishes the Prime Minister to make a statement he will do so. But I will do all I can. I cannot go further than that.

§ Mr. Jopling
Can the right hon. Gentleman say just at what time we can expect a vote on the Private Bill which is to be debated tomorrow?

§ Mr. Peart
The normal time, 10 o'clock.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. We are concerned with a statement only about a half-day's business.

§ Mr. Blackburn
Is my right hon. Friend aware that more time will be available for debate tomorrow if less time than usual is wasted on Business questions?

§ Mr. Peart
That is another matter. I appreciate that hon. Members wish to raise questions and legitimate points on business, but I wish they would not be so verbose.

§ Mr. Fortescue
Can the Leader of the House say whether the Prayer which was 1553 originally set down for after the Private Bill tomorrow will be debated tomorrow?

§ Mr. Peart
Yes, Sir. It will come as soon as the Private Business is disposed of.