HC Deb 11 March 1971 vol 813 cc587-97
Mr. Harold Wilson

May I ask the Leader of the House to 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, 15TH MARCH, TUESDAY, 16TH MARCH and WEDNESDAY, 17TH MARCH—

Industrial Relations Bill: Report stage (1st, 2nd and 3rd Allotted Days).

THURSDAY, 18TH MARCH—Supply [13th Allotted Day]: The Chairman will immediately put the Question on all outstanding Votes.

There will be a debate on the steel industry: investment and redundancies, which will arise on a Motion for the Adjournment of the House.

Motions on the Rate Support Grant (Scotland) Order and on the Rate Support Grant (Increase) (Scotland) Order.

At Seven o'clock the Chairman of Ways and Means has named opposed Private Business for consideration.

FRIDAY, 19TH MARCH—Private Members' Bills.

MONDAY, 22ND MARCH—Industrial Relations Bill: Report stage (4th Allotted Day).

Mr. Speaker, the House will wish to know that it is intended to propose that the House should rise for the Easter Adjournment on Thursday, 8th April until Monday, 19th April.

Mr. Harold Wilson

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider with his colleagues the provision of a debate in Government time on the failure of the V. and G. Insurance Company Ltd. in order that the Secretary of State can indicate to the House in debate and under questioning how it was that, in spite of the Department having knowledge of the affairs of this company as long ago as July, a large number of constituents of hon. Members in all parts of the House were conned into paying premiums to this company which proved worthless?

Second, arising on the business for Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of next week and for Monday of the following week, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the flood of Government Amendments on the Notice Paper, including a large number of controversial Clauses embodying new principles, will make it totally impossible to debate more than a tenth of all the new Clauses and of those Clauses which the Committee of the whole House never had a chance to debate? Will the right hon. Gentleman look into this situation again, because this is a Bill which, as we told him when he first imposed the guillotine, imports very great principles affecting the rights and liberties of millions of people?

Mr. Whitelaw

On the right hon. Gentleman's first point, I do not wish to comment one way or the other on the points he put forward in making his request because that is not for me. I cannot promise time for a debate on this matter in the near future because of other Government business. It is a matter which can easily be raised in other ways.

As for the debates on the Industrial Relations Bill on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of next week and on Monday of the following week, I think the Leader of the Opposition will find that the number of Amendments and new Clauses is certainly not out of line with the number tabled by previous Governments.

Mr. Rose

Rubbish!

Mr. Whitelaw

I am sorry, but before the hon. Gentleman says "Rubbish" perhaps he would look at the facts.

Mr. Rose

It is a scandal.

Mr. Whitelaw

Perhaps I should make it perfectly clear that I believe there is adequate time, and it is the amount of time that the Opposition themselves asked for on Report, because I gave two extra days to debate the matters in hand.

Sir A. V. Harvey

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some of us would like the V. and G. Insurance Company investigated with a view to its being ascertained why it took a Conservative Minister immediately after the election to get on to this when the previous Administration did nothing about it?

Mr. Whitelaw

I will certainly note what my hon. Friend has said.

Mr. Thorpe

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that many of the new Clauses which have been tabled for the Report stage of the Industrial Relations Bill are the Government's Amendments to their own Clauses which have not been debated. Surely, therefore, it is vital that they be properly debated, if only in fairness to the Government.

Second, does the right hon. Gentleman recall the exchanges which took place last Thursday when I asked him if Standing Committee B on the Immigration Bill would be sufficiently large to include all different views expressed in the House and when the right hon. Gentleman indicated that it would be a large Committee, as indeed it is? However, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on this Committee there is to date no Liberal representation? Whatever view the right hon. Gentleman might take of the views which we hold, I think he will concede that at least we have expressed, and will continue to express, a distinctive view on this matter.

Hon. Members

Hear, hear.

Mr. Whitelaw

I see no reason to suppose that the new Clauses which have been tabled for Report stage of the Industrial Relations Bill will not be debated.

The right hon. Gentleman has put the second point about the Immigration Bill very fairly and generously, because he has stated exactly what I said, which was that there would be a large Committee, and there is one. The matter of the representation on it is inevitably a matter for the Selection Committee, which operates within the Standing Orders of the House; and that is the position as regards the Liberal Party.

All I can say to those hon. Members opposite who cheered the prospect of Liberal representation, which certainly would like to see, is that it is perfectly open to the Opposition, as was constantly urged on me during the last six years, to provide one of their places for the Liberal Party.

Mr. Orme

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that what the Government are doing on the Industrial Relations Bill is an absolute outrage? We spent 10 days discussing the Bill which they presented and it now appears that they have been writing another one. The number of new Clauses and Amendments which have been tabled by the Government will make it impossible for us to reach any of our Amendments in the five days allotted for Report stage, which is making a mockery of democracy.

Is the Leader of the House aware that people outside will realise that this most important Measure will not be debated to even half the extent to which it should be debated by the House of Commons?

Mr. Whitelaw

These are matters which are much better debated next week. For my part, I have made it perfectly clear that I believe that there will be perfectly adequate time to debate the Government's new Clauses.

Mr. Russell Kerr

Absolute nonsense.

Mr. Whitelaw

The hon. Gentleman is entitled to his view. I am entitled to mine. I think that is fair. I also point out that six days on Report stage is one of the longest Report stages in Parliament's history.

Dame Irene Ward

What is happening about the Shipbuilding Bill? If we are not to have it next week, can we be assured that we shall have it the week after next? This matter is causing a great deal of anxiety and we should like to do something for ship building and get outside the Industrial Relations Bill controversy.

Mr. Whitelaw

I certainly note the importance of the Bill to which my hon. Friend refers. I cannot tell her exactly when it will be produced before the House, but soon.

Mr. Harold Walker

The Leader of the House says that there will be adequate time next week to debate the Government new Clauses. When will there be time on Report stage or on any other stage to debate the Opposition Amendments or Amendments emanating from any other quarter of the House? Is it not clear that there will not be adequate time to discuss either the new Clauses or the 97 Government Amendments, let alone the Opposition Amendments to Clauses which were never debated in Committee? Is not this a monstrous rape of parliamentary democracy?

Mr. Whitelaw

I was asked about the new Clauses and I replied about the new Clauses. I have said that I believe that there is time for these matters to be debated. How the House deploys the time given to it is for itself to decide.

Mrs. Castle

But is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that under the Report stage procedure Government new Clauses have priority and that as there are 13 of them which have to be discussed in the context of a complex new Schedule, and as there are about 90 Government Amendments, this is, in fact, the introduction of a new Bill? It will be a Committee stage, and not a Report stage. At the end of the period which the right hon. Gentleman is allowing us, there will have been no discussion whatever in Committee or on Report on the 119 Clauses of the Bill which have not yet been debated at all. Does the Leader of the House not think that that is making a mockery of Parliament?

Mr. Harold Walker

The Leader of the House should be ashamed of himself.

Mr. Whitelaw

Exactly what is or is not debated on Report must depend on how long the House takes debating various matters.

Dame Joan Vickers

When arranging business for the future, will my right hon. Friend consider referring to the sporting calendar, as it appears to me that that might facilitate the passage of business in the House?

Mr. Whitelaw

I regret to say that, as I am one of the few Members who take no interest in such matters. I had to be reminded of what my hon. Friend meant. But I note what she says.

Mr. Lawson

Now that Scottish Members are no longer busy with legislation upstairs, will the Leader of the House set up the Select Committee on Scottish Affairs?

Mr. Whitelaw

I am glad to know that Scottish Members have, after a considerable time, managed to dispose of a comparatively short Bill. I note what the hon. Gentleman says, but I cannot yet say when the Committee will be set up.

Mr. O'Malley

Before the debate on the steel industry next week, will the Leader of the House consult the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry so that on that day the Secretary of State may announce the reversal of the Government's policies which have caused the present crisis and redundancies in the steel industry?

Mr. Whitelaw

Naturally, I do not accept the premise which the hon. Gentleman puts his question, but I shall call my right hon. Friend's attention to what he has said. My right hon. Friend come well armed for the debate next Thursday.

Mr. Shore

Will the Leader of the House recognise the clear need for more informative, fuller and more frequent statements on the course of the Common Market negotiations? The habit has been established so far for the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to report after his visits to Brussels, but the Leader of the House will know that some important visitors have come to London and no statement has been made thereafter. Will he look into that?

Mr. Whitelaw

I have always promised that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy will keep the House fully informed on all his visits and make statements whenever he has anything to report to the House. This will continue. The problem with statements is that one always has to balance that with the needs of the House for time for its other business. That I seek to do. I note what the right hon. Gentleman has said. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy will make statements as and when appropriate.

Mr. Onslow

When may we expect the publication and Second Reading of the Civil Aviation Bill?

Mr. Whitelaw

I cannot give my hon. Friend an exact date at this moment.

Mr. Heffer

Will not the right hon. Gentleman reconsider his attitude on the Industrial Relations Bill? He really ought to reconsider it, since the Government new Clauses must be discussed first in any case, and there are 13 of them, plus one new Schedule. These new Clauses raise some of the most controversial issues and in many respects make the position much worse for the trade union movement than the Bill does at present. There must, therefore, be considerable scrutiny of those new Clauses, and we may never reach the end of them. Accordingly, the Government Amendments, apart from Opposition Amendments and the 110 Clauses of the Bill which were never discussed in the House, will never be reached. If the right hon. Gentleman believes in democracy, he must now agree that the Opposition have a fundamentally good case for the time to be extended.

Mr. Whitelaw

I think I am right in saying that about two-thirds of the Government Amendments are directly linked to or consequential upon the new Clauses. That makes a difference, for these matters will, no doubt, arise in debate. That is an important feature. As for reconsidering the amount of time on Report, I must go on saying—[Interruption.] I recognise that we shall never agree about it, but I must point out that this is one of the longest Report stages in the history of Parliament. That is a fact.

Mr. Tebbit

In order to expedite the business of the House, which we are all anxious to do, would my right hon. Friend consider an unorthodox proposal under which, in order to avoid time wasted on bogus, frivolous and stupid points of order—

Hon. Members

Sit down.

Mr. Tebbit

—a Member might be required to put down a deposit of a "fiver" or so, which would be forfeit to the Members' Pension Fund if the point which he raised were adjudged bogus, as was the point raised yesterday by the hon. Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Molloy), when he even misquoted me, as the OFFICIAL REPORT shows today?

Mr. Whitelaw

These interesting matters stray rather beyond my responsibilities.

Mr. Greville Janner

Will the Leader of the House consider giving time for a debate on the collapse of the Vehicle and General Insurance Company, bearing in mind not only the thousands of people who lost comparatively small premiums in some cases, and large ones in others, but the thousands who have lost their jobs and also the many persons who have lost almost everything because they had claims pending under which the drivers were insured by this company but in respect of which they are not covered by the Motor Insurers Bureau?

Mr. Whitelaw

The hon. Gentleman probably heard my earlier reply to his right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition. I recognise the importance of this matter, but I cannot promise Government time in the immediate future because of other business. There are various other ways in which the matter can properly be raised.

Mr. Grimond

Reverting to the Immigration Bill and the composition of Standing Committee B, I recognise that this is not the direct responsibility of the Leader of the House, but it is a matter for the House of Commons as a whole, and he is Leader of the House as a whole. It is an absolute scandal that the Liberal Party should not be represented on this Committee. Will the right hon. Gentleman at least have discussion about it and see whether the matter can be put right?

Mr. Whitelaw

I recognise the difficulty in relation to numbers and representation in the House and the way our Standing Orders govern the selection of Members for Standing Committees. The problem is concerned with numbers. I shall certainly look into it.

Mr. Clinton Davis

In view of the hopelessly inadequate statement made yesterday by the Secretary of State for the Environment concerning the Francis Committee Report, will the Leader of the House arrange for the House to be able to debate that report at an early date?

Mr. Whitelaw

My right hon. Friend made clear yesterday that some of the matters would involve legislation at some stage. I cannot say when there will be an opportunity to debate the report.

Mr. Hugh Jenkins

In reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer), the Leader of the House said that the Report stage on the Industrial Relations Bill would be the longest that he had known. Is he aware that, as far as I can find out, there is no precedent for Government proposals on such an occasion which, among many other things, contain a Schedule divided into four parts, of inordinate length, and itself as long as many other Bills? This will have to follow all the 13 Government new Clauses and the Amendments as well. In the circumstances, which both sides of the House agree are special, would it not be a good idea for the Government seriously to consider that we should have another week on the Bill?

Mr. Whitelaw

I must restate what I said to make it clear. I said that this Report stage was one of the longest Report stages in the history of Parliament—not that I had known. I personally believe that it is a reasonable time, and I think that we should see how we get on.

Mr. Russell Kerr

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his stubborn refusal to see fair play on the Industrial Relations Bill is encouraging the argu- ment to take place on the streets rather than in this Chamber?

Mr. Whitelaw

I cannot accept the implications of what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Mr. Ross

Did I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that next Thursday he will proceed with two most important local government Orders, the Rate Support Grant (Scotland) Order and the Rate Support Grant Order (Increase) (Scotland) Order after opposed Private Business? Does he propose to start this important Scottish business after Ten o'clock on a Thursday night?

Mr. Whitelaw

It will not necessarily be after Ten o'clock. It depends on how long the opposed Private Business takes, and it may not take that time. If it is after Ten o'clock, there are ample precedents for that course from the period of the previous Government, when the right hon. Gentleman was Secretary of State for Scotland.

Mr. Ross

Will the right hon. Gentleman quote any one precedent in respect of the Rate Support Grant Orders? It has never been debated at that time of night. Will he give us a pledge that if the debate is late in starting he will withdraw the Orders and put them down another day?

Mr. Whitelaw

I should like to see how we get on, but I believe that there will be ample time to debate them on Thursday night.

Mr. Raphael Tuck

On a point of order. As the Leader of the House has given us an assurance that there will be enough time for the Opposition Amendments to the Industrial Relations Bill to be reached, is not it up to him to promise that if there is not enough time he will allow further days for debate?

Mr. Speaker

Order. That is not a point of order.

Mr. John Mendelson

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, with reference to your policy of calling some hon. Members during business question time and not others. Is it not a fact that this is the only opportunity to raise certain subjects that may have a particular bearing upon a Member's area, his constituency, or the industry with which he is mainly concerned, and that in the past many of your predecessors have allowed one Member one business question, not knowing whether he might raise a question that has already been asked or one particularly affecting his area? If, to save time, you decide to cut out a number of hon. Members, there might be a repetition of some questions in the first part of the period of business questions, and other hon. Members who only very occasionally ask questions at this period and who have a vital area interest to raise will not be able to raise it. Could you reconsider your practice on those grounds?

Mr. Speaker

Order. This is a very difficult matter. Rather differing views have been expressed to me privately, very many welcoming the curtailment of business questions. Business questions have now been going for about 20 minutes. It is a matter of judgment. I am certainly not trying to lay down any hard and fast rule. I am judging the matter Thursday by Thursday.