HC Deb 02 November 1972 vol 845 cc331-7
Mr. Harold Wilson

May I ask the Leader of the House to state the business for next week?

The Secretary of State for the Home Department, Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Robert Carr)

The debate on the Address in reply to the Gracious Speech will be continued tomorrow and on Monday, and be brought to a conclusion on Tuesday, 7th November.

At the end on Monday—Opposition Motion relating to the Teachers Superannuation (Financial Provisions) and Family Benefits (Amendment) Regulations.

At the end on Tuesday—Motions on the Gas Boards and the Electricity Boards (Rateable Values) Orders.

WEDNESDAY, 8TH NOVEMBER—Debate on a Motion to take note of the Paper for discussion: "The Future of Northern Ireland".

Motion on the Northern Ireland Loans (Increase of Limits) Order.

THURSDAY, 9TH NOVEMBER—Motions on the Southern Rhodesia Act, 1965 (Continuation) Order and on the Southern Rhodesia (Immigration Act, 1971) Order.

Second Reading of the National Theatre and Museum of London Bill.

FRIDAY, 10TH NOVEMBER—Second Reading of the Post Office (Borrowing) Bill.

MONDAY, 13TH NOVEMBER—Second Reading of the Northern Ireland (Border Poll) Bill, which it is hoped to obtain by about seven o'clock, and of the Northern Ireland (Financial Provisions) Bill.

Motion on the Anti-Dumping Duty (No. 2) Order.

Mr. Harold Wilson

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, following discussions through the usual channels and in other ways, we are very glad that the Government accepted our view that we should not proceed next week to the debate on the Second Reading of the Northern Ireland (Border Poll) Bill but that there should be a wide-ranging discussion on the Northern Ireland situation after all these weeks, including of course the important discussions produced by the Government? Because that has been the view of the Government, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that we take the view on the Bill which has been announced for the Monday that, while we entirely reserve our attitude on how we shall vote on the Bill, which is in some respects entirely unsatisfactory—we shall have to decide how we vote—we accept, at any rate, the need for Parliament to take a speedy decision on the issues raised in that Bill, provided that they are adequately debated as I believe the Government intend? We shall cooperate in that, while giving no assurance at all of our desire to amend the Bill or, indeed, if it becomes necessary, to take a more Opposition attitude about the Bill. We have tried to help the Government on Northern Ireland and we want to continue to do all we can in this difficult matter.

With regard to Thursday's business, namely Rhodesia, will the right hon. Gentleman take note of the fact that we shall give the Government our fullest support in the matter of sanctions so long as the Government continue in these matters to carry out the policy which we laid down, which they did not always support when they were in opposition, but we are glad that they are learning the facts of life up to a point on Rhodesia? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, whereas the present Prime Minister in 1968 played a considerable part in trying to invoke another place to vote against the sanctions order, which it did, we give an assurance to the right hon. Gentleman that we shall not seek to invoke another place to resist the Government's proposals on sanctions but, indeed, returning good for evil, we shall be prepared, if he needs it, to support him in the Lobby in favour of the sanctions order?

Mr. Carr

I will, of course, as always, take note of what the right hon. Gentleman says. I suspect that it would not be right, tempted though I am, to indulge as Leader of the House in a debate on Rhodesia at the moment. All I can say is that the debates on Thursday follow exactly what my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs said in May when he reported to the House about the Pearce Commission Report.

On the first matter, about Northern Ireland, I understand and appreciate what the right hon. Gentleman said. I think it is right to have a wide-ranging debate next week and then to take the Second Reading debate on the Northern Ireland (Border Poll) Bill the following week. I particularly appreciate what the right hon. Gentleman said about the need thereafter for making quick progress with the other stages.

Mr. Kilfedder

Can my right hon. Friend say what arrangements the Government are going to make to enable legislation affecting Northern Ireland to be debated by the House other than by means of draft orders?

Mr. Carr

Yes, indeed. As I told the House in the last Session, we are actively working on the institution of a special committee for this purpose, and I hope that I shall now soon be able to give full details to the House.

Mr. Milne

In view of the latest evidence about City buccaneering in the Private Notice Question today, will the Leader of the House arrange for an early debate in this House on the question of takeover bids, mergers and monopolies, particularly arising from the Pirelli-Dunlop merger two years ago, and the recent losses by Pirelli, and its effect on employment in my constituency and other areas? May we have an early debate on this subject?

Mr. Carr

I will take note of that. It is clear that there cannot be one next week, unfortunately. It is, of course, a fact that one of the major measures mentioned in the Gracious Speech for impending legislation is directly on this subject. So that, at least, in the fairly near future will provide the House with the opportunity not only for a general debate but for detailed examination of the legislation.

Mr. Tugendhat

May I remind my right hon. Friend that in the last Session we had only one three-hour debate on London, and remind him also that he assured us that we should devote more time to the problems of London? Will he accept that early consideration of London's problems is necessary, with special reference, perhaps, to the scandalous position regarding unregulated tenancies which is developing?

Mr. Carr

I note my hon. Friend's view, and, as a Member in the greater London area, I should be hard put to disagree with him; but I cannot see any time for that purpose next week.

Mr. Lipton

When will the Leader of the House bring to the attention of his right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the important Motion No. 9 on the Order Paper relating to the export of live cattle, which has met with a wide measure of acceptance? Will he ask his right hon. Friend to do something about it quickly?

[That this House calls upon Her Majesty's Government to replace the export trade in live cattle by a carcase trade, as recommended by the Balfour Committee 15 years ago.]

Mr. Carr

I shall convey those views to my right hon. Friend.

Mr. Edward Taylor

Will my right hon. Friend take it that many of us are anxious to know the nature and extent of the comprehensive legislation on consumer protection referred to in the Queen's Speech? When shall we have an opportunity to hear the details of it, and when shall we debate it?

Mr. Carr

I think that it is a disappointment to some hon. Members, as, indeed, it is to my right hon. Friend, that the form and choice of subjects for debate on the Gracious Speech has not allowed for a debate in which this matter could conveniently be raised. I make no complaint about that; it is, of course, for the Opposition to select what subjects they wish. I shall talk to my right hon. Friend about it, but I can tell my hon. Friend and the House now that it is one of the major Measures in our legislative programme for this year, and I hope, therefore, that an opportunity to debate the Bill will not be too long delayed.

Mr. James Hamilton

Will the Leader of the House assure us that a statement will soon be made by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry on the Government's decisions regarding the policy of the British Steel Corporation? Will he take it that there is great anxiety in Scotland on the matter, and that, unless such a statement is soon made, that anxiety will continue?

Mr. Carr

I shall speak personally to my right hon. Friend about that.

Mr. Sydney Chapman

My right hon. Friend will recall that it is his intention to have a debate and decision as soon as possible on the new parliamentary building. As this was not possible last Session, could he be a little more forthcoming now and give a definite indication of when the debate will take place?

Mr. Carr

I should like to do so, but I cannot be forthcoming in the sense of being precise. It is a matter which the House will have to discuss. It is essential that it should.

Mr. Russell Kerr

Has the attention of the Leader of the House be drawn to the recent report of the Select Committee which inquired into the Independent Broadcasting Authority? Can he promise time at an early date for a debate, and may we have an assurance that there will in the meantime be no delay in appointing the full-ranging inquiry which that report called for so that the interests of the people of this country may be consulted in the matter?

Mr. Carr

It is for my right hon. Friend to make decisions and policy announcements on these matters. I cannot do that. There is time normally provided for debates on reports of Select Committees, and it is to some extent up to those concerned on the Select Committees to choose the reports to which they desire to give priority when the time for debate comes along.

Mr. Stratton Mills

I welcome what has been said on both sides of the House about the need for speed on the Northern Ireland plebiscite Bill. Is it intended to take the Committee stage on the Floor of the House?

Mr. Carr

I would think that the answer is almost certainly "Yes". It is obviously a major Bill of constitutional importance, and I think that it would be appropriate for the Committee stage to be taken on the Floor.

Mr. Harper

As there is no specific referenece in the Gracious Speech to a coal industry Bill, will the Leader of the House give time for a full-scale coal debate so that we may pursue the combined points which have been put to the Government by the National Union of Mineworkers and the National Coal Board?

Mr. Carr

I take that into account, along with the many suggestions which I see so early in the Session already coming forward for debate; but I cannot make any promise about it today.

Mr. Biffen

In view of the topicality of inflation as a matter of major political concern, can the Leader of the House say when we are to be told the view of Her Majesty's Ministers attending the Council of Finance Ministers of the Community at its recent meeting in Luxembourg? Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the desirability of ensuring that Ministers who attend meetings of such importance and significance report back to the House at the earliest opportunity so that we do not have to rely upon the newspapers to tell us what is happening?

Mr. Carr

Yes, I take that last point, and I assure the House that that will be our normal practice. I hope that the House will be a little forgiving this week, since Ministers concerned with economic matters have been a little busy.

Mr. Varley

I reinforce the plea made a moment ago by my hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract (Mr. Harper). As the Minister for Industry is on record as giving an assurance to the House late in the last Session that a coal industry Bill would be presented early this Session, and as there is no mention of it in the Queen's Speech, may we have an assurance now that a coal industry Bill will be laid before the House next week?

Mr. Carr

I cannot give an assurance about next week, but I can say that the fact that it was not specifically mentioned in the Gracious Speech does not mean that it is not likely to be forthcoming. Clearly, it is an important subject.

Mr. Harold Wilson

After that treble negative, may we have a straight answer? Will there be a coal Bill or not? We understand that it will not be next week, but are we then to understand that the omission of reference to it in the Gracious Speech does not mean that it will not necessarily not be introduced at some unfuture time? Is there to be a coal Bill? As we read in the Press that the Government have told the Press that there will be a coal Bill, will the right hon. Gentleman now tell the House?

Mr. Carr

I am sorry about my treble negative; perhaps I ought to have made it four negatives, and it might then have been all right. It is highly likely that there will be a coal Bill, yes.