BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (Hansard, 12 June 1972)

§ Mr. Marcus Lipton (Brixton)
I rise to oppose the Motion. It appears, on the fact of it, to be a simple, innocent, formal, procedural Motion, but in my opinion it conceals a little bit of sharp practice, and, indeed, trickery on the part of the Government.
It was not known until hon. Members received their Order Papers that this Motion was being set down for discussion today. What it boils down to is that until 7 o'clock there is to be a debate on a Motion or Motions submitted by Private Members. At 7 o'clock the House will proceed, on the Adjournment Motion, to debate Northern Ireland affairs, until 10 o'clock. After that the House will discuss three orders relating to Northern Ireland.
Under the Standing Orders, each of these three orders can be debated for 1½ hours. Therefore, a total of 4½ hours must be added to 10 o'clock to decide when the debates on those orders will end, which will take us to "until half-past Two o'clock" as mentioned in the Motion.
At 2.30 a.m. the Motion relating to the House of Commons Services will be proceeded with. That Motion has been set down for debate at that time in the hope that no hon. Members will be present and the Government will be able to get through on the nod their proposal for a five-tier underground car park in New Palace Yard.
I shall not enter into the merits of the proposed car park—I was speaking on that subject when the House rose at 4 o'clock on Friday afternoon—but as I have another engagement at 2.30 a.m. tomorrow it is unlikely that I shall be here then. I want, therefore, to register the strongest possible protest against the way in which the Government 1006 are trying to dodge their responsibilities and get this important and serious proposal through the House virtually on the nod.

§ Mr. Speaker
Before we proceed further with this debate, and everything so far has been in order, I think I should remind right hon. and hon. Members that this is Private Members' time. This is one of the most cherished periods in our parliamentary week, and, therefore, I hope that this matter can be disposed of speedily.

§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Robert Carr)
In view of what you have said, Mr. Speaker, I shall reply briefly. The hon. Member for Brixton (Mr. Lipton) is labouring under a basic misapprehension, and because of that he is, I am sure quite unintentionally, misleading the House on this issue.
First, this is not a Government proposal. This is a House of Commons matter, not a Government matter. The House's own Services Committee presented a report to Parliament more than a year ago saying that, in principle, there should be this underground car park, and the House approved the recommendation of its own Committee to that effect. During the current Session the Services Committee has been charged with working out the details and making recommendations to the House about how the House's own decision should be put into effect in a practical way.
That is the position. This is not in any way a Government measure. This is a matter for the House. It was recommended by the House's Committee for the convenience of hon. Members. The urgency of the matter is that, having gone into the issue extremely carefully, the Services Committee, which, as the hon. Gentleman knows, is an all—party Committee, is a servant of the House, and is in no way associated with the Government or Government policy, considers that if this work is to be done in line with the wishes of the House it is very important that it should be begun soon so that, if possible, the worst part of the work—the inconvenience, noise, dirt, and so on—occurs during the recess. That is the reason for the hurry. It has nothing to do with the interests of the Government.

§ Mr. Michael Foot (Ebbw Vale)
I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Brixton (Mr. Lipton) has raised a valid point. Although the Motion is brought forward on behalf of the House of Commons Services Committee, the choice of the time at which it is to be debated rests with the Government. I think that that is correct. The time proposed is not a satisfactory time to debate the Motion, and I think that it would be better for the Government to find some other time for it. We may be in difficulties over the timetable of the House, but it is not the case that the House is sitting until 2.30 a.m. every day.
I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will withdraw the Motion and bring it forward again at a more convenient time for the House. The time chosen by the Government is not convenient. As far as I know, my right hon. and hon. Friends have never been consulted on the matter. I think that my hon. Friend has raised an important issue, and I hope that it will be considered favourably by the Government.

§ Mr. R. Carr
I shall, of course, discuss the matter through the usual channels. I assure the House that the Government have no interest in forcing the Motion through the House. The interest here is that of every hon. Member, and the decision which they took last year should be started at a time that will produce the minimum of inconvenience to hon. Members and the work of the House.

§ Mr. Stanley R. McMaster (Belfast, East)
I wish to raise briefly one point on the Motion, and that is the way in which the three Northern Ireland orders are being dealt with. Northern Irish Members, and particularly the seven Ulster Unionists who attend regularly, welcome the opportunity today to debate Northern Ireland, particularly in view of the events of the weekend, and also the fact that the debate is to continue until 2.30 a.m. Nevertheless, because of the burden of work involved—apparently the only way in which legislation on two important and one minor matter can be dealt with is following a debate on Northern Ireland—we feel that we cannot do justice to our constituents and deal properly and thoroughly with these matters at such a late hour.
1008 My colleagues and I invite the Leader of the House to see whether it is possible to arrange for important legislation—particularly legislation coming before the House which has not been dealt with by Stormont—to be dealt with more thoroughly by the House and not, as on this occasion, by having matters lumped together in this way.

§ Mr. Arthur Lewis (West Ham, North)
I want to add briefly to what you said, Mr. Speaker.
It is wrong of the Government to put this Motion first, on the Order Paper, because they know that if someone like my hon. Friend the Member for Brixton (Mr. Lipton), who has a point, wishes to express his view he cannot do so without taking time away from Private Members.
I support what was said by my hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Michael Foot). There is no reason why the Motion relating to the House of Commons Services should not be debated at an earlier hour. There are a number of points which hon. Members wish to make on this issue, and to bring the matter on for debate at 2.30 a.m. is not the right way to treat the House of Commons.
The Leader of the House says that this is a House of Commons matter and not a Government matter. What a way to treat the House of Commons! The right hon. Gentleman has arranged this Motion, I shall not say deliberately and purposely, but perhaps by accident and without fault, to come on for debate at 2.30 a.m.
I am concerned also that the Irish orders cannot be debated until after 10 o'clock. These, too, are important matters. The Minister can resolve the difficulty by going a little further than he has done and saying that he will discuss the matter through the usual channels and will not push or press the issue at 2.30 a.m. If the right hon. Gentleman is prepared to put the Motion down for debate at a more reasonable hour so that those who wish to take part in the debate are able to do so we can probably progress without delay.

§ Mr. R. Carr
With the permission of the House, perhaps I might say that the usual channels, as usual, have worked 1009 very quickly and effectively. Of course, if it is convenient to the House to take this tomorrow evening, which will mean at a considerably earlier hour, that is perfectly agreeable.
As to the Irish business, I have already made it clear that we realise that Irish legislation which has not substantially been through the Stormont procedures will have to be dealt with in ways which we have not yet settled. I thought that in my announcement of business last week and in this Motion today I have shown, within the constraints, which are severe, that we are finding a substantially continuous period of debate on Northern Irish affairs. However, I take the point of my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, East (Mr. McMaster) about future legislation and will do the best I can about it.

§ Mr. Speaker
On the Irish point, as a matter of order perhaps I might point out that there is to be a debate on Northern Ireland affairs on the Adjournment, which will therefore be very wide. As to the orders, the first deals with exported animals, the second with compulsory insurance and employers' liability, and the third with the Appropriation Bill. The House may well decide to get rid of the first two rather more quickly than the one and a half hours allowed for each, in which case this Motion will enable the debate on the Appropriation Bill to go on until 2.30 instead of being limited to the one and a half hours.