HC Deb 20 January 1972 vol 829 cc661-73
Mr. Harold Wilson

On the assumption that the Government have not done the decent thing and resigned by then—[Interruption.]—may I ask the Leader of the House to state the business intended 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, 24TH JANUARY. Supply (8th allotted day): There will be a debate on unemployment on an Opposition Motion.

Motion relating to the Direct Grants Schools (Amendment) Regulations.

TUESDAY, 25TH JANUARY. Second Reading of the Museums and Galleries Admission Charges Bill [Lords].

Remaining stages of the Transport Holding Company Bill.

WEDNESDAY, 26TH JANUARY. Second Reading of the Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Bill [Lords], which it is hoped to obtain by about 7 o'clock.

Motions on the Family Income Supplements (Computation) Regulations, the Northern Ireland Loans (Increase of Limit) Order, the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organisation Order, and on the Import Duties (General) (No. 11) Order.

THURSDAY, 27TH JANUARY. Second Reading of the Gas Bill.

Motion on the Sugar Beet (Research and Education) Order.

FRIDAY, 28TH JANUARY. Private Members' Bills.

MONDAY, 31ST JANUARY. Supply (9th allotted day): Debate on a topic to be announced.

Motion on the Redundancy Fund (Advances out of the National Loans Fund) Order.

Mr. Harold Wilson

The debate on Monday will take place on a Motion of censure: That this House, recalling that the present Administration was elected on the strength of a clear and specific pledge by the Prime Minister…."—[Interruption.] …to reduce unemployment at a stroke…

Hon. Members

Question.

Mr. Harold Wilson

I will put it in the form of a Question.

Mr. Tapsell

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not intolerable that the Leader of the Opposition, having wholly failed to show any leadership during the disgraceful exhibition by right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite—

Hon. Members

Sit down.

Mr. Speaker

Order. Nothing out of order is happening now.

Mr. Harold Wilson

I will put it in the form of a Question.

Mr. Tapsell

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member appeared to be questioning the conduct of the Leader of the Opposition. All I can say is that nothing has happened on the business question which is out of order.

Mr. Harold Wilson

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware—

Mr. Tapsell

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker—

Hon. Members

Sit down.

Mr. Tapsell

Having just suspended the Sitting, how can it be said that nothing out of order has happened?

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member must not question my Ruling.

Mr. Harold Wilson

I was asking the right hon. Gentleman whether he was aware—if not, he is now—that the Motion will say, That this House, recalling that the present…"—[Interruption.] This has been done many times in the House during business questions. I can quote precedents from right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite. That this House, recalling that the present Administration…

Hon. Members

Reading.

Mr. Speaker

Order. Demonstrations are apt to lead to counter-demonstrations. I ask the House to settle down and calm itself.

Mr. Harold Wilson

On business, the House should be told what is being tabled tonight: That this House, recalling that the present Administration…

Hon. Members

Reading.

Mr. Harold Wilson

Right hon. and hon. Gentlemen will have plenty of opportunity to wave their Order Papers again on Monday to celebrate their million unemployed. …on the strength of a clear and specific pledge by the Prime Minister to reduce unemployment at a stroke, this House censures Her Majesty's Government for the fact that their doctrinaire and irresponsible policies have forced the total of registered unemployed in the United Kingdom to 1,023,000 persons. That will be—[Interruption.] I am asking the right hon. Gentleman, and giving him notice so that he can find an appropriate Amendment to it, whether he is aware that the House will expect to hear some time next week from the—

Dame Irene Ward

The right hon. Gentleman is out of order.

Mr. Harold Wilson

This is a question. The whole party opposite is out of order. I am asking the right hon. Gentleman—

Mr. Rost

Get on with it.

Mr. Harold Wilson

I am going to get on with it. Right hon. and hon. Gentlemen should not show their shame so noisily for what they have achieved. I am asking the right hon. Gentleman whether he will arrange for the Prime Minister to make a statement on his personal responsibility for the million unemployed on the pledge, by which alone he won the General Election, to reduce unemployment; and, forswearing alibis and excuses and blaming others, will the Prime Minister next week stand on his own feet and, after a year and a half in office, accept responsibility for his Government's actions

Mr. Whitelaw

The best thing that I can do to help the House is simply to say that these matters can be debated on Monday. I note what the right hon. Gentleman has said.

Mr. Onslow

Perhaps I may ask my right hon. Friend a serious question. Will he agree next week to refer to the Select Committee on Procedure the thoroughly disgraceful, carefully rehearsed and comprehensively orchestrated way in which Question Time today was disrupted to the grave damage of those hon. Members who genuinely wanted to put Questions to the Prime Minister?

Mr. Whitelaw

All these matters are perfectly within the remit of the Select Committee on Procedure should the Chairman wish to proceed with them. It is not for me to comment on what happened this afternoon. That was obvious to the whole House.

Mr. Loughlin

May I draw to the attention of the Leader of the House Motion No. 128 standing in my name and the names of other hon. Members dealing with the case of Miss Pauline Jones and asking the Home Secretary to release her:

[That this House views with the gravest concern the imprisonment of Miss Pauline Jones; and urges upon the Home Secretary the need to reconsider his decision and to release Miss Jones to enable her to receive psychiatric treatment at a hospital not associated with the Prison Service.]

Mr. Onslow

She is not the hon. Gentleman's constituent.

Mr. Loughlin

In view of the rather sparse business for next week, will the right hon. Gentleman assure me that we will have a short debate on this matter?

Mr. Whitelaw

I fully appreciate the importance of the subject which the hon. Gentleman has raised. There have been many exchanges and much comment in the Press. I will certainly call the attention of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary to what the hon. Gentleman has said. I am afraid that I could not in present circumstances offer time for a debate, but there are inevitably opportunities on which to question my right hon. Friend on this and other matters.

Mr. Chapman

In view of the recent very disturbing events concerning pollution from the shores of Cornwall to the waste tips in the Midlands, and with particular reference to the challenging document "Blueprint for Survival" which appeared in the current issue of The Ecologist, will my right hon. Friend find an early opportunity for a day's debate on general matters of population and pollution?

Mr. Whitelaw

This is a subject which is certainly being considered, but I could not promise a debate in the near future.

Mr. Pardoe

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a crisis of pollution raging on the Cornish beaches? Is he further aware that today there are reports that a senior official of the Department of the Environment has admitted that the Government have no plans at all to deal with chemical pollution, and that we have had no statement or defence from any Government Minister on this subject? Could the right hon. Gentleman possibly arrange for a statement or a debate? Will he stop Government Ministers from hiding behind the rules of this House to avoid coming before us and admitting their mistakes?

Mr. Whitelaw

There is no question of anyone hiding behind the rules of this House. I cannot accept some of the comments made by the hon. Gentleman. He will have appreciated that yesterday my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment promised a statement. The Under-Secretary has gone to visit the area and after he returns my right hon. Friend has promised a statement.

Mr. Tebbit

May I too, draw the attention of my right hon. Friend to Motion No. 128 mentioned by the hon. Member for Gloucestershire, West (Mr. Loughlin). This concerns my constituent, Miss Pauline Jones.

Mrs. Renée Short

She is not the hon. Gentleman's constituent.

Mr. Tebbit

She is my constituent. This Motion has been signed by 36 either ignorant, mischievous or malicious publicity-seeking hon. Members opposite. Would my right hon. Friend give an undertaking that no time will be given for this type of mischievous interference in a matter over which the Home Secretary's conduct has been totally to my satisfaction and, I believe, to the satisfaction of anyone who has respect for law and order and is not looking for cheap publicity?

Mr. Whitelaw

It is not for me to comment on the motives of people who table Motions or upon the terms of those Motions. What I am entitled to say to my hon. Friend is that as Miss Pauline Jones is his constituent he is most certainly entitled to speak as he has done.

Mr. Healey

Would the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that his right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary will make a statement to the House on Monday about the situation in Rhodesia, including the promised statement about the arrests which took place two days ago, and also a statement concerning Mr. Smith's reply, not so far received, to the representations by Lord Pearce concerning the prevention of normal political activities on the part of the A.N.C. in Rhodesia? Will he take note that, in the light of the Foreign Secretary's statement, the Opposition may wish to press for an emergency debate on this matter?

Mr. Whitelaw

My right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary has told me that he is in touch with Lord Pearce on this matter and hopes to make a statement on Monday or Tuesday, he hopes on Monday. I have noted what the right hon. Gentleman has said.

Mr. Eadie

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House that his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment will come to the Dispatch Box and make a statement next week on how he intends to end the miners' strike by giving them more money?

Mr. Whitelaw

I know that my right hon. Friend would certainly wish to keep the House fully informed of any developments, and he will do so.

Mr. Geoffrey Finsberg

Can my right hon. Friend say whether in the near future he expects to find time for a debate on the annual report of the Post Office Corporation?

Mr. Whitelaw

I could not promise such a debate in the near future. I have certainly noted the importance of what my hon. Friend has mentioned.

Mr. Dunn

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen Motion No. 122 on the Order Paper in the name of myself and my hon. and right hon. Friends?

[That this House, noting the decision to close early in the New Year, the Fisher-Bendix factory, Kirkby, near Liverpool, built and equipped with the assistance of large amounts of public money; regretting the decision to transfer valuable machinery to Spain for production there of commercially successful products previously made in Kirkby, the equivocal statements made thereon, together with the refusal of Her Majesty's Government to intervene to set up an inquiry; further noting the record of successive managements under changing ownershtip and control leading to a breach of the assurances and hopes expressed for increased employment in the Merseyside Development Area; and deploring the effect on unemployment in the area of the announced closure; calls on the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to lay a statement before Parliament setting out all the moneys provided by the Exchequer, through investment grants and otherwise, in connection with the establishment, expansion and equipment of the factory, together with the assurances and employment indications given by the then management, and the total sums of money recovered or recoverable by the Treasury; to institute an independent inquiry with full powers to examine and report upon the history of the project and the operations of the successive public companies connected therewith, and their dealings with companies abroad; and pending the receipt and publication of the report of the inquiry to represent to the new owners of the company operating the factory the vital necessity of suspending all further redundancy procedures and steps aimed at closure.]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are grave issues of public policy and stewardship of public investment involved, in addition to the unemployment that could be caused by the closure of the factory? Can the right hon. Gentleman find time next week for a debate on this matter?

Mr. Whitelaw

I fully realise the importance of this Motion which stands in the name of the hon. Gentleman, the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition and others. I am afraid that I could not give time for a debate on this subject next week, but of course there are other opportunities and debates in which it could be raised.

Mr. Jennings

Is my right hon. Friend yet in a position to tell the House what form future Common Market debates will take?

Mr. Whitelaw

The legislation will be brought forward in due course and there will be debates upon it.

Mr. Harold Wilson

Returning to Motion No. 122, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that, while this threatened closure is paralleled by many other actual or threatened closures in all parts of the country, it is in an area which has become a by-word for juvenile unemployment in particular? Will he, if he cannot promise time for a debate next week, consult with his right hon. Friend who is called upon to take certain action in the Motion to make a statement to the House at the appropriate point about the future of the factory and the action he is taking in relation to the inquiry for which the Motion asks?

Mr. Whitelaw

I will, in view of what the right hon. Gentleman says, have discussions with my right hon. Friend on that basis.

Mr. John Robertson

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the unprecedented level of unemployment in this country is a matter of great concern to every hon. Member and that all of us will never be able to speak in a day's debate next week? Will he consider giving two days to debate the unemployment question? It seems that the business for next week is rather sparse and that the right hon. Gentleman is filling the week up. Does unemployment not merit a two-day debate?

Mr. Whitelaw

The House will share the hon. Gentleman's concern, but I am afraid that I could not give a second day next week.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

May I inform the Leader of the House that I shall be opposing Motion No. 4 on today's Order Paper on the subject of Parliamentary Questions and, as that will necessitate a debate, possibly next week, can he arrange for this to come on early rather than as the last Order? He will realise that he slipped this on the Paper last night without any chance of Amendment. We ought to have an opportunity to discuss this at a normal time rather than in the middle of the night?

Mr. Whitelaw

The hon. Gentleman must do me reasonable justice. He says that I "slipped it on last night". I put it down last night. I did not propose to suspend the rule, on the simple principle that such a Motion, which I understood was giving effect to what was widely desired in all parts of the House, a Select Committee on Parliamentary Questions, would be agreed to without debate. I thought that was reasonable in the circumstances. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to oppose it then of course I will not get it tonight as the rule has not been suspended. If he opposes the Motion I will put it down again—

Mr. Lewis

Early.

Mr. Whitelaw

I am afraid it will not be very early in the day, but the hon. Gentleman and I have long experience of talking through the night. I hope the debate will not be for quite as long next time as it was on the last occasion.

Dame Irene Ward

Will my right hon. Friend accept that, while I am generally in agreement with him on this matter, I am very disappointed that he has not seen fit to appoint a woman to this Select Committee? Is he aware that matters relating to questions of procedure in the House are just as important to women as they are to other Members?

Mr. Whitelaw

I must apologise to my hon. Friend. I did not wish in any way to disappoint her, but the names were thought on both sides to be the names of those who would be prepared to give a considerable amount of time to an important subject. I can only note what my hon. Friend has said and regret my error.

Mr. Thorpe

Reverting to the point raised by the hon. Member for Leeds, East (Mr. Healey) and the Foreign Secretary's undertaking to make a statement on the Rhodesian situation on Monday, as a report yet to be confirmed, has indicated that one hon. Member well known for his sympathetic support for the Smith régime has already been allowed to enter Rhodesia, will the right hon. Gentleman convey to his right hon. Friend how important it is that the rights of Members of this House in a British colony are made quite clear in that statement on Monday?

Mr. Whitelaw

I did say that my right hon. Friend hoped that the statement would be on Monday but it might be Tuesday, depending on the information he receives. I reserve that position. I trust it will be Monday. I will certainly see that the right hon. Gentleman's remarks are brought to the attention of my right hon. Friend.

Mr. John E. B. Hill

As the Leader of the Opposition has described his Motion for next Monday as a Motion of censure, will arrangements be made through the usual channels to enable the British delegation to the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, which is due to leave tomorrow, and has already been held back since last Tuesday, to remain at Strasbourg?

Mr. Whitelaw

These are matters for the usual channels and no doubt will be considered in that way.

Mr. Orme

Could I draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention to Motion No. 133, about the proposed closure of a major engineering factory in the Greater Manchester area? There is an urgent need for a debate, particularly since unemployment in the Greater Manchester travel to work area has now increased to 30,135—something unprecedented in such an area. In consequence, will the right hon. Gentleman allow one or two days following the broad debate on unemployment for a debate on these proposed factory closures, when we could discuss such matters as Churchills, Fisher-Bendix, Plessey, U.C.S. and so on, because there is a very important principle here of workers fighting for the right to work who are determined to remain at work, come what may?

[That this House deplores the decision of Alfred Herbert Limited in giving notice to the 1,100 employees of one of their subsidiaries, Churchill Machine Tools Limited, that they will close that factory and transfer the work and machines elsewhere; notes the outstanding skill and craftsmanship contained at Churchills; further notes that this particular firm has an order book of over £2¼ million and a reputation of meeting such orders on time; welcomes the decision of the shop stewards and workers at this firm to fight this proposed closure and further welcomes the decision of the Coventry employees of Alfred Herbert to support the workers of Churchill Machine Tools Limited in their campaign to maintain the factory which is in an area of increasing unemployment, particularly in the engineering industry; and calls upon Her Majesty's Government to resist such closures, and calls upon Alfred Herbert to reverse this decision which is against the interest of the working people and the industry concerned.]

Mr. Whitelaw

I note what the hon. Gentleman says. I suggest that these matters should first be discussed, with others, on Monday. Then let us see how we get on.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. We have a very important debate ahead. Mr. Ross. last question.

Mr. Ross

I should like the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider his answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Paisley (Mr. John Robertson). He will appreciate that the biggest rise of unemployment in these figures announced today, which have caused quite a shock to everyone, is in Scotland, where now nearly one man in ten is unemployed. Does the right hon. Gentleman not appreciate that this calls for a special debate, apart from the main debate which we are to have next week, on this particular subject? Is it any coincidence that the Secretary of State for Scotland is not on the Front Bench today—or is it that he dare not show his face, in view of the scandalous figures?

Mr. Whitelaw

It is not for me to reply to that sort of thing on business questions, but it was a little unfair of the right hon. Gentleman—

Mr. Ross

Look at the unemployment figures.

Mr. Whitelaw

I was not arguing that. I just said that it was unfair to refer to my right hon. Friend in that manner, and I am entitled to say so. As to the right hon. Gentleman's question about a debate, I note what he said. I have already said that the debate is to take place on Monday; after that we shall see how we get on.

Later

Dr. Mabon

On a point of order. I do not normally reflect on the discretion or judgment of the Chair—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—may I finish?—even privately. Therefore, I make this point of order, as I believe it to be, in all sincerity. Is it not the case that successive Speakers have protected the rights of individual Members so as to make sure that all of us who consistently rose from beginning to end to put a business question, possibly about other business, are allowed to do so. As least three hon. Members on this side—that is not very many—are in my position, and perhaps one on the other side of the House —[An HON. MEMBER: "Never mind them."] I apologise for being too fair to the other side. Since we have been consistently pursuing one point at every business question time for the last four weeks it is a little unfair to ignore those of us who have consistently tried to bring some item before the House with more urgency than the Leader of the House seems to think it merits.

Mr. Speaker

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for saying that he did not seek to reflect on my judgment, but it is my judgment. If the House were to say, by Standing Order, that I should call every hon. Member who wished to ask a business question, I should do so. I must exercise my judgment as best I can. It is not perfect, but I do the best I can. I must remember that we have a most important debate today. Although this may mean that I am depriving one hon. Member of the chance to ask a question, another hon. Member on the back benches may thus be enabled to make a speech. I must make the best judgment I can—and I do not expect to satisfy everyone.

Mr. Heffer

Further to that point of order—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh, no."] I am very sorry that hon. Members opposite are not pleased at the fact that I am getting up. Nevertheless, let me tell them that, at this moment, many of my constituents are sitting in and occupying a factory in Kirkby because of the high unemployment, which has now risen from 52,000 to 54,000 in one month. In the circumstances—

Mr. Speaker

Order. That fact is most regrettable, and no doubt it will be debated on Monday. But it cannot possibly be the foundation for a point of order.

Mr. Heffer

Further to that point of order. The issue of the occupation of factory of Fisher-Bendix and of other factories is not the question of general levels of unemployment, although it is associated with it. It is a factor of great importance on its own and raises issues of importance on its own. We are asking for a debate on that issue, which is of great importance to the workers of this country.

Mr. Speaker

It is not a point of order for me now.