HC Deb 03 February 1972 vol 830 cc696-7
Mr. Arthur Lewis

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I beg to seek leave to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter, namely, the loss of life of a miner while picketing at a power station. I gave you preliminary notice at 2.34 p.m. this afternoon that I should seek the opportunity to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9. I say "preliminary notice" because it was my wish that one of the hon. Members representing Yorkshire mining constituencies might take this opportunity. I was a little dismayed to hear that you had said that you agreed to accept—

Mr. Speaker

Order. All I ever said was that I have had notice of an hon. Member's intention to ask leave.

Mr. Lewis

I apologise and unreservedly withdraw what I said. You have received notice, Mr. Speaker, of a Private Notice Question tomorrow.

With the greatest respect, I feel that this matter is urgent and should have precedence over the Orders of the Day, since much may happen between now and tomorrow morning. Today's business is not so urgent. There are not many people who care whether betting, gambling and gaming are discussed now or put off to a later date.

It might not have been necessary for me to make this application had either the Leader of the House or the Secretary of State for Employment responded to the Opposition Front Bench and said that he would come to the House tonight at seven o'clock to make a statement. It might not be necessary for me to make the application if the Government would say that this is a much more important and urgent matter than the subjects set down for discussion in the Orders of the Day, so that we could have even a short debate on this important subject.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) has asked 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 loss of life of a miner while picketing at a power station. I accept the seriousness of this incident and, if I may do so without being patronising, I should like to commend the hon. Member. He addressed his remarks to the urgency of the matter and the reason why it should have precedence.

If I were to decide in favour of a debate on this subject it might mean that it would be debated on Monday, and there could not be the statement tomorrow about which we have heard. I am not prepared to give this matter precedence over today's business and I must reject the hon. Member's request.