HC Deb 19 November 1970 vol 806 cc1430-41
Mr. Harold Wilson

May I ask the Leader of the House if he will state the business for next week?

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. William Whitelaw)

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

MONDAY, 23RD NOVEMBER—Supply (6th Allotted Day): There will be a debate on Aircraft Supply, which will arise on an Opposition Motion.

Motions relating to Ten Minute Rule Bills.

TUESDAY, 24TH NOVEMBER—Second Reading of the Civil Aviation (Declaratory Provisions) Bill and of the Town and Country Planning Regulations (London) (Indemnity) Bill.

WEDNESDAY, 25TH NOVEMBER—Remaining stages of the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill.

THURSDAY, 26TH NOVEMBER—Debate on a Motion to take note of the Consultative Document on the Industrial Relations Bill.

FRIDAY, 27TH NOVEMBER—Private Members' Motions.

MONDAY, 30TH NOVEMBER—Consideration of Private Members' Motions until 7 p.m. Afterwards, Report and Third Reading of the Family Income Supplements Bill.

Mr. Harold Wilson

The right hon. Gentleman has been asked week by week since early in July—he was asked again recently—when we can expect the Coal Bill and what its contents will be. He was asked in July to give a simple assurance, yes or no, as to whether it would contain everything that had been in our Bill. Will he now give us an answer? We have been waiting for getting on for six months for a decision on this.

Second, although it is not in next week's business, in his statement referring to the business for the following Monday, the right hon. Gentleman said that we should have Report and Third Reading of the Family Income Supplements Bill. May I ask him at this early stage, so that he has time to think about it again, whether he is aware that this gives insufficient time for the Report stage and for an adequate debate on Third Reading? Will he look at this again and perhaps inform the House next week what conclusion he has reached?

Mr. Whitelaw

The Coal Bill will be published next week. On his second point; I shall bear in mind what the right hon. Gentleman says. I should like to see how we get on. I shall certainly consider his proposition.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I remind the House that there are important debates ahead.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Can my right hon. Friend say a little more about Monday's second item of business, the procedure on Ten Minute Rule Bills? Will this be treated as a House of Commons matter with a free vote?

An Hon. Member

On both sides.

Mr. Whitelaw

I thought that it was right that before we started on Ten Minute Rule Bills again in this Parliament the House as a whole should have the opportunity to make up its mind on Reports of the Select Committee on Procedure, which has recommended changes in Ten Minute Rule Bill procedures both as to notice and timing—on two occasions. Therefore I have put down those Motions for Monday night. I am authorised by my right hon. Friend the Chief Whip to say that on this side of the House there will be a free vote for everyone, including members of the Government. I intend merely to put before the House what the Select Committee on Procedure says. I shall make my personal position clear without binding anyone to a vote other than myself.

Mr. Peart

I thank the Leader of the House. We, too, shall have a free vote.

Mr. Burden

Has my right hon. Friend's attention been drawn to Early Day Motion No. 113 which asks for a debate on the Littlewood Report? The Committee was set up by the last Conservative Government, and it reported in 1965. There has not been a debate. There is considerable public concern and concern in this House, as shown by the fact that Members of all parties have signed the Motion. Will my right hon. Friend consider an early debate?

[That this House draws the attention of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to the fact that the Littlewood Committee Report, Experiments on Living Animals, Command Paper No. 2641, which was published in April, 1965 has not yet been discussed by This House; and, in view of the public concern at the increasing number of animals subjected to vivisection, calls upon Her Majesty's Government to afford time for an early debate.]

Mr. Whitelaw

I fully recognise the importance of the subject. I cannot foresee an opportunity in Government time in the near future, but I shall consider the matter.

Mr. Swain

A fortnight ago the right hon. Gentleman said, in a voice loud enough to stop nearly all the pit wheels in Great Britain, that he would bring forward the Coal Bill at the earliest possible moment. May I beg him to bring it forward because—

Hon Members

It is next week.

Mr. Swain

I have had the Bill on my mind for so long that I have not been listening to what the right hon. Gentleman said.

Mr. Whitelaw

Perhaps it would be in order for me to apologise to the hon. Gentleman for not having given the answer to his right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition loud enough.

Mr. Jopling

Is my right hon. Friend yet in a position to tell us when we shall have the opportunity to get rid of British Standard Time?

Mr. Whitelaw

The House will have an opportunity to decide what it wishes to do about British Standard Time, I hope, the week after next.

Mr. Urwin

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the very great concern over the Government's regional policy? One might almost describe it as a lack of policy. In view of the importance of this subject, will the right hon. Gentleman give us time for an early debate?

Mr. Whitelaw

I fully appreciate the importance of the subject. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we on this side of the House are only too pleased to show what we are seeking to do for the benefit of the regions. I cannot provide Government time in the near future, but I notice that there is a Private Member's Motion on the subject and I shall consider whether Government time can be found later.

Mr. Swain

On a point of order. I apologise to you, Mr. Speaker, but I was under a misapprehension—I very often am—when I asked my question, which was to have been, "Will the right hon. Gentleman bring forward the Coal Bill and can we have a debate on it immediately it is introduced to allay the anxieties that are being created from day to day in the coalfields of Great Britain?".

Mr. Whitelaw

I promised the Leader of the Opposition that the Bill would be published next week, and I very much hope also to be able to announce next week when the House will be able to debate its Second Reading.

Sir D. Walker-Smith

In view of the somewhat erratic flow of information from the Common Market negotiations and the gathering anxiety in the country that the people may be led into a position of which most of them would disapprove, can my right hon. Friend arrange for an early debate, at any rate before Christmas, on the negotiations? May we take it from the very fair and democratic procedure outlined for Monday night that when the time comes there will also be a free vote on this matter?

Mr. Whitelaw

On my right hon. and learned Friend's first point, he will be aware that my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster answered questions on these matters this week, when he reported that he was having another negotiating meeting on 8th December. There will be the normal statement, as promised, after that meeting. I shall consider the question of a debate on the subject before Christmas. I should not wish my right hon. and learned Friend or anyone else in the House to read anything one way or the other into the decision for Monday night. It is a special case and is no precedent one way or the other.

Mr. Harold Wilson

This is a serious matter. Will the right hon. Gentleman have a discussion with his right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster on whether he is giving as much information to the House as the House is entitled to? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is the impression of some of us that his right hon. and learned Friend is giving less information than the present Prime Minister did when he used to report to the House after such meetings? The matter is further complicated by the fact that on this occasion, when there are almost daily or weekly meetings of officials, there seems to be a great deal of information given about what individual British officials are saying on individual questions, which makes it very hard for hon. Members to make up their minds about what is going on. At least we should be told by the right hon. and learned Gentleman in the House as much as is being given to the Press—which we do not object to—about what officials are saying on behalf of Ministers. Will the Leader of the House discuss the question with his right hon. and learned Friend and consider whether we could have a further statement from him before his next visit—indeed, next week?

Mr. Whitelaw

I fully recognise the importance of what the right hon. Gentleman says. The Government are most anxious to keep the House as fully informed as possible at all stages in the negotiations. That is what we have undertaken to do, and that is what we will do. I shall discuss this with my right hon. and learned Friend to see, if we are not fulfilling that purpose, how better we can do so.

Mr. Bidwell

Does the absence of a new Bill on Commonwealth immigration so far mean that the right hon. Gentleman has taken seriously to heart my advice to him last week to let the Select Committee on Immigration and Race Relations go to work first?

Mr. Whitelaw

I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman can presume that far.

Mr. Loughlin

In view of the confusion caused by the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in answering questions earlier this week, will the right hon. Gentleman revise his programme for next week and allow us to have a debate on the intolerable increase in food prices since 18th June?

Mr. Whitelaw

I understand that my right hon. Friend was referring to the retail index of food prices, which all Governments have used. I shall call his attention to what the hon. Gentleman has said. I cannot see time for a debate on that matter next week.

Mr. Douglas

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's seeming undertaking to discuss regional policy, will he give us an assurance that at least in the not too distant future we can have an opportunity to discuss the deteriorating economic position in Scotland?

Mr. Whitelaw

I shall call the attention of my hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland to what the hon. Gentleman has said, without accepting the policy point which he makes. I am always a little reticent about the conduct of Scottish business. There are opportunities in the Scottish Grand Committee and elsewhere. I shall look into the whole question.

Mr. Atkinson

Is the Leader of the House aware that four senior Ministers have this week and last week made important statements of Government policy in public speeches, and yet it is not now possible for Members to question them about their speeches because of the Government's instructions on the question of overlords and so on—at least, the instructions to the Table Office preventing those Ministers from being questioned? Will he give assurances that he will reconsider the whole situation whereby senior Ministers are becoming part of a Cabinet team and therefore cannot be questioned in the House? Will he examine the matter and make those Ministers available for questioning?

Mr. Whitelaw

It is certainly my purpose that statements of Government policy are made in the first instance to the House of Commons. If there are difficulties as regards the new Departments, I shall look into them. I think that hon. Members on both sides appreciate that the new Departments, particularly some that were fully supported by right hon. Gentlemen opposite, raise problems of delegation. If there are difficulties of this sort, I am very pleased to look into them.

Mr. Crosland

May I ask the Leader of the House about the rate support grant, on which there has been some speculation in the Press? When will a rate support grant Order be laid before the House, and will a statement be made?

Mr. Whitelaw

I shall call the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment to what the right hon. Gentleman says. I cannot say when an Order will be laid. I note what the hon. Gentleman says about a statement and will inform my right hon. Friend.

Mr. Crosland

I must press the Leader of the House on this. There has been a statement in the Press today, and it has been widely reported, that a rate support grant Order will be laid next Thursday. With respect, the Leader of the House should know whether or not that is the case.

Mr. Whitelaw

I shall look into this. I do not know when the rate support grant Order will be laid, nor can I, therefore, confirm or deny what is said in the Press. I shall find out the position.

Mr. Jay

Did the right hon. Gentleman note the very warm welcome given to his proposals for free votes by the House, including members of the Government, and will he consider extending the principle more widely, particularly where the powers of the House are concerned?

Mr. Whitelaw

I should say with perhaps a little caution to the right hon. Gentleman that I made it very clear that the reason for the free vote on Monday night is that I regarded Ten Minute Rule Bills as essentially a House of Commons matter for the House as a whole to decide. When it comes to questions of Government policy, Governments and Oppositions always—and I speak with some knowledge of this matter—have thought it right to express to their members what they believe to be the right course.

Dame Irene Ward

Since there are many important issues which we would like to debate, may I ask whether we could not have a day for comprehensive discussions on any sort of subject? Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that I have at least 12 such matters I would like to raise?

Mr. Whitelaw

I have a suspicion that the kind of day envisaged by my hon. Friend would not lead to a very orderly debate. However, I appreciate the many subjects in which she takes a personal interest and know how much she does on all of them for the good of the North. She will have her opportunities in this House and no one knows better how to use them.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

Has the attention of the Lord President been drawn to the unemployment figures announced today, which are the highest since the 1940s? In view of the urgency of this matter, could we have a debate on this subject next week, or would the Prime Minister make a statement to tell us that the Government will deal with this as urgently as they cut the taxes of the rich?

Mr. Whitelaw

I note the importance of the problem raised by the hon. Gentleman. As for debates and statements, he should look at the practice followed by his own party when in government, when situations worse than the present ones arose.

Mr. William Hamilton

Referring to the business to be discussed on Monday evening dealing with the Ten Minute Rule Bills, will the right hon. Gentleman make it quite clear that it is the intention of the Government to push those Ten Minute Rule Bills of back-bench Members from half-past three until ten o'clock? Will he not admit that he is providing a golden opportunity for back-benchers on both sides of the House to defeat the Executive, and may I take this opportunity of issuing a verbal three-line Whip to them all to vote against the Government?

Mr. Whitelaw

The hon. Gentleman, who is always extremely fair, is perhaps being a little less fair than usual on this occasion. After all, I have promised that there will be a free vote on this side of the House, with the authorisation of my right hon. Friend the Chief Whip for all Members, including members of the Government. I also said that I was giving the House an opportunity as a whole to decide on the reports of its own Select Committee on Procedure. I also said that I for my part would make my personal position clear but that I would not seek by my voice to bind anyone else to vote, except myself. How on earth can the hon. Gentleman square his statement that the Government are trying to shove the whole thing through with all those assurances that I have given?

Mr. William Hamilton

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. That was a rhetorical question which the hon. Gentleman does not have the right to answer.

Mr. Skinner

Reverting to the question of the rate support grant and, in particular, the domestic element, since the right hon. Gentleman is unaware of the negotiations that have been concluded with the local authorities, will he remind the Secretary of State for Social Services of the Answer he gave me last Wednesday when I asked him if the domestic element would be increased as in the previous four years. The reply then was that it was not in dispute. Is he aware that the speculation in the Press today and earlier in the week suggests that this is not so?

Mr. Whitelaw

I will certainly call the attention of my right hon. Friend to what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Mr. Roy Hughes

May I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to Early Day Motion No. 134?

[That this House is deeply concerned about the decision to authorise the Port of Bristol's West Dock Scheme under section 9 of the Harbours Act 1964; and urges Her Majesty's Government, prior to any development taking place, to undertake a detailed investigation of the effect of such a development on the existing trade and future of the South Wales ports.]

This Motion stands in my name and the name of many other Welsh hon. Members and concerns the Government's decision to authorise the Port of Bristol West Dock Scheme. Does he appreciate that this decision is causing considerable concern in South Wales? Can we have an early debate on this and other matters relating to port investment generally?

Mr. Whitelaw

I have before me the important Motion of the hon. Gentleman and his Friends. No doubt my right hon. Friend the Minister for Transport Industries will have noted its terms. I cannot offer time to debate it in the near future.

Mr. Bob Brown

Has the Leader of the House seen Early Day Motion No. 136?

[That this House, noting the financial loss incurred by Swan Hunter Ltd., the main Tyne shipbuilding consortium, in the first half of 1970, expresses its deep concern at the continuing uncertainty about the policy of Her Majesty's Government on the shipbuilding and ship-repair industries and the impact and effect on it of the abolition of investment grants and the phasing out of regional employment premium; and calls upon Her Majesty's Government to make an immediate declaration of continued full support for the industries, the extension of the period of responsibility of the Shipbuilding Industry Board and other measures to continue the practical steps previously taken by the former Labour Government to assist and improve the efficiency of the industries.]

This relates to the shipbuilding and ship-repairing industries. Bearing in mind the statement of the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry regarding lame ducks, will he provide time for an early debate on the position of the shipbuilding industry, so that we may elucidate from the Government whether this is to be a lame duck or a dead duck?

Mr. Whitelaw

On 9th November, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry announced that he would be making an Order extending the life of the Shipbuilding Industry Board. There will clearly be an opportunity to discuss these matters when that Order comes forward.

Mr. Hugh Jenkins

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that he said he hoped to find time for the Prayer set out in that Early Day Motion No. 107?

[That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Order 1970 (S.I., 1970, No. 1537), dated 19th October 1970 a copy of which was laid before this House on 19th October, be annulled.]

Is he able to say when that time will be found, or can he at least say that such time will be found before the expiration of the period in which the Prayer can be debated?

Mr. Whitelaw

I undertook to consider this through the usual channels and I must apologise to the hon. Gentleman because my discussions have not been completed. I will do my best to meet his wishes—I think I can guarantee to him that I will.

Mr. Lawson

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that he undertook to look sympathetically at the possibility of finding time to debate the Report of the Select Committee on Scottish Affairs? Bearing in mind the vast amount of time spent by hon. Members in compiling this Report, will he make a special effort to see that we debate it on the Floor of the House and not upstairs in the Grand Committee?

Mr. Whitelaw

I appreciate entirely the importance of Scotland and what the hon. Gentleman says, but I am rather surprised that he feels it would not be appropriate to debate this Report in the Scottish Grand Committee. I cannot offer time on the Floor of the House in the near future. Perhaps in those circumstances the hon. Gentleman may consider whether there would be other opportunities. I have certainly noted what he says.

Mr. Leadbitter

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen Early Day Motion No. 90 which is supported by a number of hon. Members on both sides of the House?

[That this House regrets the action of Her Majesty's Government to terminate the grant to the Consumer Council; notes the valuable work of the Council in representing the viewpoint of consumers to Parliament and the nation; and urges Her Majesty's Government to show some concern for the consumer interest and remove from itself the charge that it is niggardly, shortsighted and indifferent to consumers by reviewing its decision.]

This is to do with the Government's decision to abolish the Consumer Council. In view of this decision and a large range of questions concerning the consumer, would the Leader of the House give an undertaking that an early occasion will be provided to debate consumer protection?

Mr. Whitelaw

I have noted the Motion. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister dealt very clearly with some of these matters a short time ago at Question Time. At present I can find no time for such a debate.

Mr. Ashton

Can the Leader of the House tell us if there is any reason why he puts controversial issues before the House on Thursdays rather than Tuesday or Wednesday?

Mr. Whitelaw

I am surprised at that statement—or question—from the hon. Gentleman, because only last week I took specific action to do just the opposite. I regret that it was not possible to make some changes which I know the Opposition would have liked regarding this Thursday. I am sorry about that, I tried to find a suitable date, but it was not possible on this occasion. This is something I will always seek to do whenever I can, but sometimes, as I am sure the hon. Gentleman appreciates, one has to accept that it cannot be done.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) indicated that he was graciously deferring a point of order during Question Time.