BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (Hansard, 2 March 1972)

§ 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:

§ Mr. Harold Wilson
Having heard the right hon. Gentleman's words, whatever difference there may be between the two sides of the House on the subject of the Motion on Monday, I think it right to express our thanks to him for moving so quickly to put it before the House.
Secondly, with regard to the Northern Ireland debate about which he has been asked, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we have not pressed the Government unduly to hurry this debate, although after the previous legislation had to be rushed through we felt there should be an early opportunity for this? I do not know whether he is able to give an indication yet that there will be the intended statement from the Government before we ask for the debate in Government time which the right hon. Gentleman has offered. Is he aware that we trust it will not be too long delayed? On the other hand, it is better to get the right statement a day or two late than to rush the whole proceedings and perhaps get it wrong.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his first point. On the 756 second point, I am grateful to him for his forbearance on this complicated matter. I will certainly note all that he has said and respond in the same way as he has put it to me.

§ Sir Robin Turton
I notice my right hon. Friend has not been able to include Motion No. 213 for debate next week.
[That this House, concerned at the deterioration of standards of civilised behaviour in Parliament, and aware that on certain occasions the rule prohibiting smoking in the division lobbies has not been observed, shall appoint a select committee to inquire into these breaches.]
Would he consider taking up through the usual channels the question of whether we could have a short debate next week on this important subject of the breach of the parliamentary convention on smoking in Division Lobbies? Otherwise, the health of hon. Members and possibly of some hon. Friends may be in danger.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
Not being a smoker, I am not very much aware of this, one way or the other. However, I note the importance which is attached to the convention. I am afraid I could not give time for such a debate next week. It is a convention of the House and one which the House obviously as a whole would wish to observe.

§ Mr. English
When will the right hon. Gentleman carry out the assurance he gave the House that we should have before us all documents necessary for the consideration of the European Communities Bill? In particular, when will he publish in the English translation and place in the Vote Office the decisions of the Council of Ministers which have not so far been published? Many of my hon. Friends and I have asked various Ministers about this on several occasions, last night and on other nights. When will this be done, or if it will not be done, why not?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
The hon. Gentleman and I appear to be in dispute on this matter. I said that I would ensure that all documents necessary for consideration of the Bill would be available. I believe they are; he believes they are not: and we both appear to hold to our particular views.

§ Dame Irene Ward
As the Chief Constable of Northumberland has expressed the view that the proposed Home Office reorganisation of the police is impractical, could I ask my right hon. Friend for time for a debate on this subject? Since most North Country Members on our side of the House are Ministers none of them can make any comment on the chief constable's views. I would like to make known those views because I believe in the police and I think the Home Office is quite wrong, and I hope it will be defeated.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
As one of the North Country Members to whom my hon. Friend refers, obviously I could not agree with her last comment. Nevertheless, I note what she has said. I appreciate the importance of the subject. I am afraid I could not give time for a debate, but I will certainly call her views to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

§ Mr. C. Pannell
Perhaps I missed something in the right hon. Gentleman's statement. I had rather anticipated something which has not cropped up. He will know how helpful I have tried to be in this matter. Would he like to make a statement on the question of my Motion still standing on the Order Paper which I wish to have removed as soon as possible?
[That this House dissents from the intention of Mr. Speaker to address the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed by a style and title which he has disclaimed and therefore has no right to use; notes the assurances in the House by the Leader of the House and Mr. Attorney-General, respectively, during the second reading of the Peerage Bill in June 1963 that the effect of the Bill on the rules of the House would be that a Member disclaiming a peerage would be a commoner and would be described in the records of the House as Mr.; notes also that these were accepted as correct statements of the effect of the Bill by the House at that time; and regrets that, by reversing the decision of his predecessor which was made in the light of these statements and the advice then given to him by those officially concerned, Mr. Speaker should have impinged upon the privileges of both Houses.]

§ Mr. Whitelaw
The right hon. Gentleman has not missed anything. What I should say to him is that I have had —as I think he knows—some further discussions on this matter. I am pursuing these discussions. I may have something to report to the House. If I do not, then of course I stand by my promise that there should be an opportunity for this debate before the Budget.

§ Mr. Burden
Further to the request of the Leader of the Opposition for an early debate on Northern Ireland, may I draw my right hon. Friend's attention to Early-Day Motion No. 218?
[That this House urges Her Majesty's Government to make the Irish Republican Army an illegal organisation, in view of the fact that it is raising money in the United Kingdom and elsewhere with the express purpose of mounting murderous attacks upon the Forces of the Crown and civilians and thereby attempting to create a state of anarchy.]
This Motion is signed by myself and about 60 hon. and right hon. Members and asks for legislation to ban the Irish Republican Army. My hon. Friend will surely agree that it is quite unrealistic for this Government to continue to bring pressure to bear on the Republic of Ireland to increase their efforts to suppress the I.R.A., which is an illegal organisation in that country, while allowing it to remain legal in this country. It is also unrealistic to allow its agents and representatives to collect sums of money here which will be transferred to Ireland and used to prosecute the aims of the I.R.A., including causing the death and maiming of members of Her Majesty's Forces and of innocent people, and the destruction of property.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
In view of such recent happenings, it is natural that there should be strong feelings in this country and on all sides of the House on this matter. I am afraid I could not give time for a debate on this Motion next week although I fully appreciate the feelings which lie behind it. In the difficult situation in Northern Ireland it is right that I should not say anything provocative one way or the other, but simply say that I note the Motion and fully understand the strong feelings behind it.

§ Mr. Michael Foot
Does the Leader of the House appreciate that, apart altogether from the crisis over the Government's Common Market legislation which will be discussed on Monday, the Government have steered their legislative programme into a state of muddle of monumental and historic proportions? Is he aware that the conditions that are being imposed on members of the Housing Committee, for example, are quite intolerable and amount to an interference in the rights of those Members of Parliament to participate fully in the affairs of the House? There has been a breakdown in several of the other Committees; one had to be suspended this morning because hon. Members did not understand the meaning of the E.E.C. legislation and how it affected the Bill. Therefore, will the Leader of the House consider the state of legislation and recognise that he should be coming forward with suggestions to the House about which of these deeply offensive Measures he proposes to withdraw before the whole system seizes up and comes to a standstill?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
The hon. Member is prone to some exaggeration, and I certainly would not accept what he says. I would remind him, although I do not suggest for one moment that he was in any way responsible, that when his party was in Government that Government introduced a vitally important Measure in August and had to rush it through at grave inconvenience to this House in the early days of August. This Government have certainly not done that.

Hon. Members
Yet.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
As Opposition Chief Whip in the last Parliament, I know very well some of the muddles the previous Government got into. The hon. Gentleman was not responsible for them I know, but that does not entitled him to criticise this Government for what they are doing, which is much better than anything carried out by his party.

§ Mr. Emery
Has my right hon. Friend had drawn to his attention the fact that the House in Committee spent eight and a half hours earlier today on points of order? If this or some similar circumstance happens again, will he consider referring this matter for consideration by the Select Committee on Procedure?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
I am all too painfully aware of what went on during the hours of last night, as are a great many other hon. and right hon. Gentlemen. Not all are. I would be very careful before saying anything which might in any way be a reflection on the Chair. That is very important and should be considered carefully by hon. and right hon. Gentlemen in all parts of the House. I do not wish to comment further, but that is something which certainly could be considered by the Select Committee if it thought fit. The sensible answer is that we did at the end of the night get on to the business of the Committee, and I hope that from there we can proceed in the normal manner.

§ Mr. Oram
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is some time since the House debated aid for and trade with developing countries? In view of the importance of this question and the third United Nations Conference on Trade and Development will the right hon. Gentleman arrange for a debate on this subject and the Government's policy towards it before Easter?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
I fully appreciate the hon. Gentleman's interest in the subject and its importance. I am afraid that I could not provide time for a debate on this subject before Easter. I regret this all the more because it would be good for this House, the country and perhaps the world to know how much this Government and country are doing in such matters.

§ Sir D. Walker-Smith
Without entering into the delicate question of the selection of Amendments for the European Communities Bill, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether any representations could be made to the Chairman of Ways and Means to make somewhat earlier selections so as to give hon. Members more time to study the Amendments to be debated?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
I will, naturally, look into the point. I do not know fully the circumstances about the time allowed so far. I do know that the Chairman will be most anxious to give all the help he can. I am sure he will note what my right hon. and learned Friend has said, but I will certainly call it to his attention.

§ Mr. William Hannan
May I ask the Leader of the House whether he has now given consideration to the request made to him last week for the provision of time on the Floor of the House to debate the reorganisation of local government in Scotland? Is he aware that this matter has been dragging on since last February and that local authorities and administrative bodies are becoming anxious? Has he got anything extra to add?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
I am afraid I have not got anything further I can offer. I must point out that when censure Motions are tabled, whether dealing with the Chair or similar to that which we are to debate on Monday, time has to be found by the Government for debate, which makes it all the more difficult for me to find time for other debates.

§ Mr. Awdry
May I return to the question of the points of order? Should we not have a look at our Standing Orders to try to prevent these endless points of order obstructing the business of the House? I know that my right hon. Friend is being good-tempered and charming about it, but people are getting somewhat angry about the way in which the business is being disrupted.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
I will certainly bear in mind what my hon. Friend has said. I also note, and it is right to say it, that on these occasions tempers do sometimes run high. I say this in the most reasonable manner possible, but all of us are responsible entirely to this House, to our constituents and to ourselves for any action we may take at any moment of time. That is our responsibility for which we are answerable. If in the process any of us by what we do do harm to Parliament, that is something we would all regret, and I for one would like to make sure that such a thing does not happen in future.

§ Mr. Jay
To avoid further harm to Parliament, will the right hon. Gentleman consider, after Monday's debate, arranging what Sir Winston Churchill used to call a "parley on neutral ground" between the two sides to see whether we can discover an acceptable method of selecting Amendments on the European Communities Bill, since, clearly, orderly debate cannot continue if the method of selection is unacceptable to half the Committee?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
I must be careful here. The right hon. Gentleman is a considerable parliamentarian, much more experienced than I am, and he will be the first to appreciate that the selection of Amendments must be a matter for the Chair. If, in the conduct of Committee stage, with "parley" through the usual channels we can reach a more orderly debate, then we on this side of the House would be very ready to take part in such discussions.

§ Mr. Biffen
Is my right hon. Friend aware that last week he said he would seek whenever possible to avoid an overlap of the work of the Standing Committees upstairs and the consideration of the European Communities Bill? Is he further aware that I and, I am sure, many others are immensely grateful to him for those sentiments? Could he say, in respect of the legislation which we shall have to enact to implement the £35 million that will be paid to Upper Clyde Shipbuilders, that to avoid this overlap the Committee stage of the legislation will be taken on the Floor of the House?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
My hon. Friend has produced a very cunning proposal which I would need more time to consider. On his point about trying to avoid a clash between Standing Committees and the debates on the European Communities Bill, I said that I would do my best. This is something that has happened to all Governments. I did undertake that Committees would not sit on Wednesdays and that I would seek to have the Committee stage of the European Communities Bill on the Wednesday. That undertaking I have fulfilled.

§ Mr. Frank Allaun
No. The Housing Committee is sitting upstairs.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
I think I have fulfilled that undertaking.

§ Mr. Skinner
You have not. I have not been out of this building at all since Monday morning.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order.

§ Mr. Skinner
Bloody well call me, then, I will explain if you call me.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
The hon. Gentleman must be fair to me.

§ Mr. Skinner
The right hon. Gentleman lied to me on the phone.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Member said that the Leader of the House had lied to him on the phone. That is not a parliamentary expression, and I really must ask the hon. Member to withdraw it.

§ Mr. Skinner
I think it is necessary for me to explain the events—

Hon. Members
No.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I want the hon. Member to follow this. He has used an unparliamentary expression, and it is my duty to ask him to withdraw it. If he does not, I am afraid that I shall have to ask him to withdraw from the Chamber. I would ask him to withdraw it.

§ Mr. Skinner
The Leader of the House, the other day when I raised this matter—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. This is not possible. I am afraid that the hon. Member has either to withdraw the unparliamentary expression or to obey my direction to withdraw from the Chamber.

§ Mr. Michael Foot
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I greatly hope that my hon. Friend will be willing to withdraw the remark that he made, because I am sure he will appreciate on reflection that that is the way in which our procedure could advance. If he could know that he would still have the opportunity —will he not?—of putting a question at a later stage, then I would hope that he would be willing to withdraw the remark which was an unparliamentary expression. He would still have his right to put a question later to the Leader of the House in accordance with the procedure of the House.

§ Mr. Speaker
So far as I am concerned, the hon. Gentleman must either withdraw the unparliamentary expression or withdraw from the House. I call upon the hon. Gentleman to withdraw the unparliamentary expression; if he does not, I must ask him to withdraw from the House. I must warn the hon. Gentleman that if he will not obey my instruction to withdraw from the House then I shall have no recourse other than to name him; and the consequence if he is named and the Motion is carried is that he is 764 suspended from the service of the House for five sitting days. That is the consequence.

Hon. Members
Point of order.

§ Mr. Speaker
I really think the situation cannot be helped by points of order from other hon. Gentlemen. This is a matter between the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) and the Chair. This is an unpleasant task for the Chair. If the hon. Member will neither withdraw the expression nor withdraw from the House, then I tell him again that I am put in the very unenviable position of having to name him.

§ Mr. Skinner
On the basis, Mr. Speaker, that I shall have the opportunity—

Hon. Members
No.

§ Mr. Speaker
I am very sorry, but that is a matter which must be left to me in my discretion. There cannot be conditions about a matter of this sort. I must ask the hon. Member to withdraw his unparliamentary expression or else face the consequences.

§ Mr. Skinner
I withdraw the unparliamentary expression.

§ Mr. Speaker
I am obliged to the hon. Member.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
Perhaps before continuing my answer I might simply say to the hon. Gentleman that I am grateful for his withdrawal. If anything that I said on the telephone when he rang me—and, indeed, woke me up—at one o'clock in the morning was in his opinion incorrect or inconsistent with what I have said, I can understand that and I am grateful to him for the manner in which he has withdrawn.
As for the further point of my hon. Friend, I do not think that the Committee stage of this Bill is likely to be taken on the Floor of the House, but it is certainly a matter I will consider.

§ Mr. Frank Allaun
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am not going to accuse the Leader of the House of being a liar, but you will recollect that a couple of days ago the right hon. Gentleman said that he would not allow Standing Committees to be held on Wednesdays, so that they would not interfere with the E.E.C. debate; but it has happened 765 again. We sat until 6 o'clock yesterday morning, and 5 o'clock on the morning before, and there was a 27-hour session the previous Wednesday. We have no undertaking that it will not happen again.

§ Mr. Speaker
Again, this is a matter of comment or debate, but not a matter of order for me. It is a matter of representation, but not a point of order.

§ Mr. John Mendelson
Whilst I do not accept that the Leader of the House necessarily knows what went on earlier today in the Committee of the House, on the European Communities Bill, because he was absent from his duties for five and a half hours and therefore has not got the detailed knowledge that he otherwise might have had had he been present and before arguments were allowed to arise on questions that have been put to him, may I ask whether he realises that all this trouble is due to the fact that the Government have deliberately chosen to introduce a Bill that cannot be amended in its major portion and that the only remedy and the only hope of making any progress on this Bill is to withdraw it and introduce it in a new form?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
On the first point, I must make it perfectly clear that I was in the precincts of the House the whole of last night. As my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster is in charge of the Bill I do not see that it demands my presence in this House the whole time. I was in this House for a considerable part of the evening. I think the hon. Gentleman is being extremely unfair. I do not accept for one moment what he is saying. As for what he says about the Bill; I do not accept that point. It has been argued at interminable length. He likes to hold that view, and I totally disagree with him: and there we shall have to leave it.

§ Mr. Rost
So that the E.E.C. Bill can make progress next week, can we have an assurance from the Leader of the House that the Leader or the Deputy Leader of the Opposition will be present at least during a good part of the proceedings so that we may have some order and discipline from Opposition Members?

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. That really is not a matter for the Leader of the House.

§ Mr. Skinner
It will be in the recollection of the Leader of the House that on Thursday, 24th February, in response to a question by the hon. Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen), he gave a pledge —that is probably as broadly as it can be interpreted—that there would be no Committee meetings on Wednesday.
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as a result of the fact that the meeting was taking place on Tuesday with respect to points of order, I came down and held a consultation with him outside the Bar of the House in which he said that as a result of the likelihood of the Housing Finance Committee sitting until the early hours of the following morning he would take measures to see to it that there would be some curtailment in order that we could get some sleep, in order to take part in what is double duty, in serving on Standing Committees and at the same time taking part in the debate on the Common Market Bill? He will, of course, recollect that later that night—at ten minutes to one—when it became apparent that I would be sitting for many more hours—I had not then been to sleep for two days: I have not been to sleep for four, as it now stands—I informed the Leader of the House and he told me that the Minister in charge of the Bill, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Mr. Amery) had said: In the last analysis it is not a matter for the Leader of the House to decide how long Committees sit; it is for me. I reminded the Leader of the House of this particular information, and on the basis of the consultations we had had previously, several hours before, the Leader of the House like any good Tory, backed his Minister. That is a matter for him. But it was certainly a different conversation from the one that took place some time earlier.
Therefore, I am asking the Leader of the House, on the basis that some of us —certainly I myself—have never set foot outside this building since twenty past ten on the morning of Monday, when that Committee commenced, for some different arrangements next week.

§ Mr. Speaker
I think that is quite enough to be going on with.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
I think that in all the circumstances I was extremely generous to the hon. Gentleman, and I hope he will be equally generous to me. Some of my hon. Friends might say I have been too generous. I made it perfectly clear to my hon. Friend the Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen) that one of the two days allocated to the Committee stage of the European Communities Bill would be a Wednesday, when I understood Committees upstairs would not be sitting. That, of course, referred—and I think the hon. Gentleman would fairly regard it as referring—to the time on the Wednesday when the European Communities Bill would be before the House. I would have thought that a perfectly reasonable proposition. That is certainly what I meant, and that it what I stand by.

§ Mr. Skinner
When do we sleep?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
I might well ask the hon. Gentleman that, too.

Hon. Members
Try to answer.

§ Mr. Whitelaw
The hon. Gentleman must accept that I have been extremely reasonable. I accept that he has, too. I realise that the hon. Gentleman has been in a difficulty, but I stand by my particular undertaking, that the Committee on the Housing Finance Bill would not be sitting at the time of the Committee stage of the European Communities Bill on the Wednesday afternoon—and it is not. That is my commitment, and it is exactly what I carried out. I cannot say any fairer than that.
If the hon. Gentleman seeks to refer to a private conversation with me, of course there can be two views on a private conversation. I have never thought it particularly wise for private conversations between Members necessarily to be brought to the Floor of the House and treated as commitments. There is a danger in that. I should like to say that if I went too far in anything I said, I understand it. I do not think that I did, but I am trying to be as helpful as I can in all the circumstances.

§ Mr. Arthur Lewis
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order.

§ Mr. Lewis
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
Not now. I will rule on the privilege issue, and then the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) can raise a point of order. Even points of order must come in their proper place.