§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. William Whitelaw)The business for next week will be as follows:—
MONDAY, 29TH NOVEMBER.—Supply (2nd allotted day): Conclusion of the debate on Northern Ireland. Remaining stages of the New Towns Bill. Motions on the Education (Provision of Milk and Meals) Regulations.
TUESDAY, 30TH NOVEMBER—Supply (3rd allotted day): There will be a debate on Pensions, which will arise on an Opposition Motion. Remaining stages of the Banking and Financial Dealings Bill.
WEDNESDAY, 1ST DECEMBER—A debate on Rhodesia, on a Government Motion. Motions on the Textile Council Orders and the Import Duties (General) (No. 7) Order.
THURSDAY, 2ND DECEMBER—Supply (4th allotted day): There will be a debate on a Motion to take note of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Reports from the Committee of Public Accounts in Session 1970–71, and the related Treasury Minute (Command No. 4817).
FRIDAY, 3RD DECEMBER—Private Members' Motions.
MONDAY, 6TH DECEMBER—Second Reading of the Housing (Financial Provisions) (Scotland) Bill.
§ Mr. DribergMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has noted Early Day Motion No. 63 which has been signed by hon. Members who are in favour of and some who are opposed to the broadcasting of the proceedings of Parliament?
§ [That this House, in view of the varying opinions expressed by hon. Members on the question of broadcasting the proceedings of Parliament, urges Her Majesty's Government to provide a full 1562 day, other than a Friday, for a debate on this subject; considers that, if the debate should end in a division, the matter should be determined by a free vote of all hon. Members, including members of Her Majesty's Government; and commends to the attention of hon. Members the report of the Select Committee of 1966 (House of Commons Paper No. 146), in which the relevant evidence and arguments were thoroughly examined.]
§ Will he please consider giving a full day, not a Friday, to this quite important subject?
§ Mr. WhitelawI am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, whose Motion I have noted, as I have noted the other Motions concerned with this important matter. I repeat my undertaking that a full day of Government time will be allocated to a debate on this important subject. It will probably be after Christmas, and I shall ensure that it is a day generally convenient to right hon. and hon. Members in all parts of the House.
§ Mr. PagetOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not know whether this is the right moment, but I ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House to consider the statement we have recently heard. Is this the appropriate moment to do so?
Mr. SpeakerNo, not until questions on the business statement are finished. I will tell the hon. and learned Gentleman when the time comes.
§ Mr. Kenneth LewisIn the debate on Rhodesia on 1st December, would my right hon. Friend consider suspending the rule for 1½ hours?
§ Mr. WhitelawThis can be considered through the usual channels, and I undertake to do that.
§ Mr. MaclennanIs the Leader of the House prepared to consider giving more than one day's debate to the Rhodesian question? The House is unaware of the terms of the Motion but if, in any sense, it is definitive and something to which the House may give its imprimatur, it is clearly unacceptable that only four hours' debate should be available to backbenchers who seek to protect the 5 million Africans who appear to have been betrayed.
§ Mr. WhitelawI am prepared to discuss the matter through the usual channels, and no doubt the hon. Gentleman will speak with his Front Bench if he wishes to pursue this matter.
§ Mr. ThorpeAs I do not flow down the usual channels, may I press the Leader of the House a little further? Is he yet in a position—if he says "No" one will understand it—to help the House as to the nature of the debate? Will it simply be a "take note" Motion or a Motion seeking approval? Second, will he again give very serious consideration to extending the limit, because even a one-day debate on a Motion to take note, or even to approve, is a very short time for hon. Members in all parts of the House to express their views on a very complex and, from any position, a vital subject which is the responsibility of the House?
§ Mr. WhitelawI shall certainly note what the right hon. Gentleman has said. I shall consider it. The debate will arise on a Government Motion.
§ Dr. GlynWould my right hon. Friend consider Early Day Motion No. 3, standing in my name, on the restriction of time allocated to speakers? Is he also aware that there is considerable pressure on both sides of the House to get this Motion debated. Could he see a way of having the Motion fully discussed in the House, because it is a House of Commons matter?
§ [That this House considers that, in order to increase the opportunities for back-benchers to contribute to proceedings, the occupant of the Chair should have the power to limit the time taken by back-bench speakers to 10 minutes in any debate, except by leave of the House.]
§ Mr. WhitelawI have previously undertaken that there should be an opportunity to discuss the matter, which is clearly, one for the House. I cannot say when that will be, nor could I give an undertaking about the length of it. I must add that before any such debate takes place right hon. and hon. Members in all parts of the House who wish to get into debates have their own remedy.
Mr. PavitttIs the Leader of the House aware that since 1959 I have entered my name in the ballot 130 times? 1564 On the Order Paper today I have seven National Health Motions which together have attracted 750 signatures from this side of the House. Is it possible that we could discuss one of these matters before Christmas?
§ [That this House demands a complete revision of the present arrangements for the employment of doctors in National Health Service hospitals with the object of securing the abolition of the secrecy surrounding merit awards for consultants; a more balanced career structure, a square deal for junior hospital doctors and substantial changes in the private practice arrangements made by part-time consultants and specialists for paying patients using National Health Service facilities who should pay their full economic cost.]
§ [That this House notes that the occupancy of pay-beds in the hospital service was 60 per cent. in 1969, and calls therefore for a 40 per cent. reduction in the total number, now 4,429 in England, authorised under section 5 of the Act.]
§ [That this House urges Her Majesty's Government to issue exemption certificates for prescription charges to all persons who have suffered or are suffering from schizophrenia, coronary thrombosis, chronic asthma, Parkinson's disease, and to all others who require constant or intermittent medication.]
§ [That this House is of the opinion that substantial resources could be made available for other needs of the National Health Service if Her Majesty's Government made determined efforts to reduce the present expenditure of £203 millions upon the pharmaceutical services for the year 1971–72 by an immediate review of the Voluntary Price Regulation agreements made with drug manufacturers and by the bulk purchase of those medicines most extensively prescribed by general practitioners by exercising the provisions of section 59 of the Health Service and Public Health Act 1968.]
§ [That this House urges Her Majesty's Government to issue exemption certificates for prescription charges to all women over the age of 60 years.]
§ [That this House requests Her Majesty's Government to obtain a full report on their progress in implementing the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 from all local authorities, 1565 and also full details of the help they are now making available under the Act after the first year of its operation.]
§ [That this House believes that the Medical Research Council should retain its close links with the universities and for this and other reasons should remain within the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Education and Science.]
§ Mr. WhitelawClearly, I commiserate with the hon. Gentleman about getting a place in the Ballot. He may be lucky shortly. I note what he has said, but I could not give an undertaking at present.
§ Mr. Alfred MorrisHas the Leader of the House seen Early Day Motion No. 42 about local government reorganisation and the police, which has the support of right hon. and hon. Members in all parts of the House? If he is unable to find time for a debate next week, will he consider finding time for such a debate at the earliest possible date?
§ [That this House notes with anxiety the effect of the Local Government Bill on the future organisation of the police service; recalling the far-reaching programme of amalgamations completed in 1969, is concerned at the probable breakup of efficient police forces which will result if Her Majesty's Government insists that police force boundaries must be coterminous with those of local authorities; notes that these proposals have created fresh uncertainty and anxieties among serving police officers in respect of their careers and family circumstances; and calls upon Her Majesty's Government to consider, as a matter of urgency, entering into further consultations, with the Police Federation and other police organisations, with a view to devising a system of police administration which will retain existing forces as far as is consistent with the interests of police efficiency.]
§ Mr. WhitelawI could not find time for such a debate, although I appreciate entirely the terms of the Motion. Some of these matters arose in the debate on the Local Government Bill, and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has been considering them. I shall certainly pass on to him what the hon. Gentleman has said.