§ Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely,
the closure of the Workington Ironworks, announced this morning by the British Steel Corporation, which was the subject of comment this morning by Mr. Ian MacGregor during the proceedings of the Select Committee on Industry and Trade".The matter is specific, because the BSC is Workington's principal employer. The ferocity of the corporation's recent decisions are generating levels of unemployment that demand urgent and effective action by the Government. The Prime Minister's indifference and insensitive response at Question Time yesterday further reinforce the need for urgent debate.The matter is important because, with the completion of the BSC redundancy programme—and this morning's announcement provides for a further 907 redundancies—unemployment in my travel-to-work area will have tripled in 24 months. The House will be aware of the long list of tragedies that have befallen my constituents in the past two years—the closure of BIP, Fisher Control, Bata Footwear, Courtaulds, K Shoes, Textured Fibres and the Distington foundry, and major redundancies at High Duty Alloys, Paul Green Spectacles, Condura Fabrics, Spillers Foods and Millers Footwear. The House must understand the personal tragedy for the community, cast adrift and now helpless before the ravages of industrial recession.
The matter is urgent. My constituents cry out for help. I beg the House to respond.
§ Mr. SpeakerBefore I reply to the hon. Gentleman I must apologise to the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Fry). The application under Standing Order No. 9 770 made by the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) is not identical to the other application and does not involve British Leyland's proposals. However, I was aware that it involved redundancies.
The hon. Member for Workington gave me notice before 12 noon today that he might seek to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that he thinks should have urgent consideration, namely,
the closure of the Workington Ironworks, announced this morning by the British Steel Corporation, which was the subject of comment this morning by Mr. Ian MacGregor during the proceedings of the Select Committee on Industry and Trade.As the House knows, when I receive applications under Standing Order No. 9 about closures in hon. Members' constituencies I always take them very seriously, as do hon. Members. However, the House will be aware that I do not decide whether this matter should be debated. I merely decide whether it should be debated tonight or tomorrow night.I listened with anxious care to the hon. Gentleman's statement, but I have to rule that his submission does not fall within the provisions of the revised Standing Order and, therefore, I cannot submit his application to the House.
Mr. Eric S. Heifer (Liverpool, Walton)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am not challenging your ruling, but could we have some clear guidance? When it was announced that Shotton steelworks was to close, and that The Times was to close, debates were initiated under Standing Order No. 9. Hon. Members would like some guidance about the subjects that can be raised. Both of the matters raised today are important, particularly to the areas and workers involved. Therefore, it would be a good idea to have some written guidance on, or an understanding of, when and how we can raise matters.
§ Mr. SpeakerI am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman. However, he will be aware that the House has given me instructions to the effect that I must give no reasons for my decision. I must obey the instructions of the House.