HC Deb 10 March 1971 vol 813 cc419-21
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. William Whitelaw)

I wish to make a short business statement about tomorrow's Supply Day. Until about seven o'clock there will be a debate on a Motion for the Adjournment of the House on Rolls-Royce. This will be followed by the business which has already been announced.

Mr. Harold Wilson

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we wish to thank him for his co-operation in this matter? Will he note that although we could have had a whole day in Supply a half day will be allocated to hon. Members who wish to express anxieties about the redundancies which have been declared in Rolls-Royce? Is he further aware that we regard this occasion as purely a sounding debate to express those anxieties and that we do not intend to press the wider question of any decisions on Rolls-Royce by the Government? We feel it right that while the negotiations are taking place on this matter the House should not express a view and would want to wait for a White Paper or for a decision to appoint a Select Committee. For these reasons the Opposition, whatever anxieties may be expressed, do not intend to take the matter to a vote.

Mr. Whitelaw

I am grateful for what the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition has said. Of course, it is quite proper and hallowed by precedent from the previous Opposition that if a request is made on a Supply Day of this sort, particularly on a Defence Supply Day, that something should be taken before another subject that has been accepted. The Government accept the wish of the Opposition on this occasion. This will be an important occasion for the House, and the decision of my colleagues is that it is right that I personally should reply to the short debate tomorrow night.

Mr. Scott-Hopkins

Notwithstanding what the Leader of the Opposition has said, I would ask my right hon. Friend to think again about this matter. The House has already had four debates upon this matter in the last three weeks. I imagine that there will be no statement tomorrow about the future of the RB211 and, since we will not be discussing the main questions, it seems rather pointless to have a debate at this moment of time—particularly when at present the new board of Rolls-Royce apparently is unwilling to meet either the trade union leaders or suppliers of their engines. Would it not be preferable to postpone this debate until next week?

Mr. Whitelaw

Whatever may be the rights or wrongs of the matter, I would point out that tomorrow is an Opposition Supply Day. If the Opposition feel that it is their public duty to have this debate, then that is their decision. Everyone in this House must be answerable for the consequences of his own actions. If the Opposition decide that it is right to have this debate at this particular time in the negotiations, that is their decision. It is not for me to deny them their right. Of course, I am entitled to question their wisdom, if I wish.

Mr. Lipton

To what extent will the debate on the Army Estimates be truncated as a result of this decision?

Mr. Whitelaw

The debate on the Army Estimates will follow the Rolls-Royce debate.

Mr. Harold Wilson

Before the right hon. Gentleman prepares his speech for tomorrow, to which the whole House is looking forward, would he reconsider some words he has just used? Is he not aware that I said we regarded this as an occasion to air the anxieties of hon. Members, particularly those with constituency interests, about the redundancies—which, as I understood the Minister's statement, related to redundancies which have been declared regardless of the future of RB211? Since I said that we did not regard this as an occasion on which to embarrass the Government in the middle of negotiations, would the right hon. Gentleman reconsider his words about our wisdom in pressing for such a debate?

Mr. Whitelaw

If it is the position that the Opposition merely wish to discuss the redundancies and do not in any way wish to discuss the future of the RB211 contract, then of course I understand what the right hon. Gentleman has said.

Mr. Goodhart

Does my right hon. Friend recall that not so many years ago we used to spend as long as 12 hours in discussing the Army Estimates and that therefore some three hours of discussion is not a very long time for such a debate? Will he consider extending the time?

Mr. Whitelaw

I note what my hon. Friend has said. I am, of course, prepared to consider any propositions which are put to me if they have widespread support in the House.