§ Mr. Frederick LeeI wish to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9 for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter which should have urgent consideration, namely,
The closure of the Irlam steel works of the British Steel Corporation involving over 4,300 redundancies and other redundancies of steel workers in various parts of the country, especially the Hartlepools and Teesside.I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for The Hartlepools (Mr. Lead-bitter), who also was to have sought to catch your eye, Mr. Speaker, to move the Adjournment of the House, for allowing me to do so.The matter is most urgent because, unless we can obtain from the Government a statement that they are prepared to reconsider their attitude towards the B.S.C.'s capital investment and pricing policies, the rundown of this plant will be begun forthwith.
It is important and specific because to date no local workshop discussions about the announcement can be meaningful without such a statement having been made. At this stage neither the work-people in the factory nor the local authority have had the slightest oppor- 1180 tunity of discussing this matter. I myself heard about it only 24 hours ago.
Unemployment has been rising rapidly in the vicinity of this steel plant, and it does not seem that there is much opportunity for the many thousands of people who are to be displaced obtaining employment in the near future. Also it seems anomalous that at the moment when we are increasing our imports of steel and increasing our exports of steel scrap we should be faced with redundancies of well over 7,000 skilled steel workers, instead of their being able to pursue their occupation at such an important time. I had correspondence with Lord Melchett during the whole of last year over the capital programme for Irlam steel works. I thought until the General Election that it looked as if we would get it. Now it seems things have been changed very differently.
I ask, then, that the House should be permitted to discuss this matter in order that 7,000 people who are able, as they have proven in the past, to produce some of the finest steel in the world, and able to assist with our export drive, should be allowed to go on doing so instead of being forced by this Government to cool their heels in idleness.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe right hon. Gentleman asks leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter which he thinks should have urgent consideration, namely,
The closure of Irlam Steel works of the British Steel Corporation involving over 4,300 redundancies and other redundancies of steel workers in various parts of the country, especially the Hartlepools and Teesside.He goes on to give his reasons why the matter seems to him to be urgent.I must tell the House that nothing gives me more anxiety than an application such as this, but these are matters left entirely to my discretion under the Standing Order and in accordance with the guidance laid down by the Report of the Select Committee on Procedure. I feel that other ways must be found for pursuing this very important matter, and I cannot submit the application to the House.
§ Mr. TinnOn a point of order. Without, of course, challenging your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, and following upon your 1181 explanation of it, may I not ask the Leader of the House if he will make a statement, bearing in mind that the only recent debate we have had upon this industry was an extremely short one when, despite the fact that hon. Members on both sides of the House kept their speeches to the minimum, barely exceeding five minutes each, and despite their doing their utmost to ensure restraint in expressing opinion, there were Members like myself who have worked in the steel industry and been a steel trade unionist, who represent constituencies with steel works, who were unable to make contributions? I make no complaint about this because it was in the nature of that debate, but may I appeal through you, Mr. Speaker, to the Leader of the House to give us an assurance that we will have opportunity for a debate in the near future?
§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. William Whitelaw)Further to that point of order. The whole House realises, Mr. Speaker, the extreme difficulty of the position in which you are put in matters of this kind, and I do accept at once what you say when you suggest that there are other ways in which the House can deal with this matter. What I should like to do is to discuss the possibilities through the usual channels, and I would hope that by some changes which I may be able to make to meet this point of view I should be able to offer some satisfactory answer at business questions tomorrow.
§ Mr. EnglishFurther to that point of order. We all sympathise with what the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the House has just said about the position in which you are put, Mr. Speaker, by the necessity to make this decision, but it goes a little further than that. It is 1182 not only this subject but any other where the Chair has discretionary power—for example, in the selection of Amendments at a Report stage. If we are to have discussions on this subject I think there are other vital matters which should be discussed, because though it is difficult for you, Mr. Speaker, it is perhaps better for back benchers and Front benchers that you make these decisions in these difficult circumstances rather than other people.
§ Mr. SpeakerI note what the non. Member has said, and I appreciate the spirit in which he has said it. I only ask him to read again the Report of the Select Committee on Procedure.