Yes, Sir. The business for next week will be as follows:
Consideration of the Motion on the Anti-Dumping Duty (No. 2) Order.
TUESDAY, 18th DECEMBER.—Supply [4th Allotted Day]: Motion to move Mr. Speaker out of the Chair, when a debate will arise on an Amendment to take note of the Eighth Report, 1961–62, and the Third Special Report from the Estimates Committee.
Second Reading of the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Bill [Lords], and the Betting Duties Bill [Lords], which are consolidation Measures.
Consideration of the Motion on the British Transport Reorganisation (Compensation to Employees) Regulations.
WEDNESDAY, 19th DECEMBER.—Consideration of the General Grant Orders and Transitional Adjustments Regulations for England and Wales, and of the General Grant (Scotland) Orders.
Consideration of the Motion on the Motor Vehicles (Variation of Speed Limit) Regulations.
THURSDAY, 20th DECEMBER.—SeCOnd Reading of the British Museum Bill, and Committee stage of the Money Resolution.
Has the Leader of the House seen reports of a deterioration of the situation in the Congo? Will he discuss this matter with his colleagues so that the House may have a statement on this and on the attitude of Her Majesty's Government towards it before we rise for Christmas?
There is a Motion on the Order Paper signed by a considerable number of hon. Members—I think a number of hon. Members on this side of the House—but all I can say on that is that the anxiety which that Motion reflects is very well understaood by the Government. The Foreign Secretary will be discussing these matters in Paris. Therefore, I think that we can leave the question of initiative to him.
Might I, rather unexpectedly to me, reinforce a plea of the Leader of the Liberal Party by stressing that we might have rather more than a statement on the Congo and press for a debate on this subject before the House rises for Christmas? Does my right hon. Friend realise the widespread concern felt in this country about the threatened use of farce again to bring about a political settlement by the United Nations, a body which has spent years and years preaching self determination above all other considerations in obtaining settlements for the political futures of emergent peoples? Does he realise how much we feel a sense of repugnance about what may transpire?
My hon. Friend will remember that I made it quite clear, speaking on behalf of the Government, that we fully understood the reasons why the Motion has been on the Order Paper.
May I call the attention of the Leader of the House to the fact that the Minister of Power comes last in the list for questioning next Monday and that today we have had a very important announcement about the possible take-over of Whiteheads, of Newport, by Stewart and Lloyds? In view of the repercussions that this could well have if the industry is concentrated on employment in South Wales, including the social repercussions, will the right hon. Gentleman ask the Minister of Power to make a statement on this, otherwise there will be no opportunity of raising it until, perhaps, the take-over has been concluded?
On the general question, as the hon. Member perhaps knows, it is proposed that there should be some alteration in the roster of Questions which will affect the Minister of Power and which will be for the convenience of the House. On the particular question, I cannot promise that, but I will convey it to my right hon. Friend.
Can my right hon. Friend say whether he has observed that, so far, we have not had a statement from the Government or a debate about the situation in South-West Arabia, particularly the Yemen? Since the Foreign Secretary criticised me aid other hon. Members for going to the Yemen, could I suggest that criticisms of that nature are made on the Floor of the House and not in tittle-tattle at Conservative Party meetings upstairs?
May I also ask him whether he will ask the Foreign Secretary's mouthpiece on the Front Bench now to consider cooperating with the United States to recognise the Yemen so that we can have a debate, and debate it clearly, across the Floor of the House, and not upstairs?
I would make it clear that I do not accept in any way the things that my hon. Friend has chosen to say about the Foreign Secretary or about those Ministers who speak on foreign affairs in this House.
It is well known that Her Majesty's Government take a different attitude from that of my hon. Friend about the situation in the Yemen. This does not, with respect, mean that Her Majesty's Government are wrong.
Not before Christmas. I have made it clear that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary is anxious to make a statement to the House on this matter, but thinks it right—and I think that the hon. Member will agree with this—that it should not be made until all the cases are disposed of.
May I call the attention of the Leader of the House to the Motion standing in the name of myself and the names of 114 other hon. Members asking the Government to change their policy and allow deceased Service men to be brought home for burial if their families request it? While I recognise that there is probably not time to debate this matter before the Christmas Recess, will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that we can have a short debate on this topic shortly after we return?
[That this House views with great concern Her Majesty's Government's policy of burying deceased Service men abroad during peacetime; draws attention to the changed circumstances which will now allow all deceased Service men to be brought home if requested, by air trooping services, at little cost to Her Majesty's Government, thereby reducing distress to relatives, and causing unnecessary costs to families, and calls upon Her Majesty's Government to effect a change in this miserly and discriminatory attitude.]
Can the Leader of the House say whether the Government are able to make any announcement about regulations or legislation concerning the number of people who have applied to stand for Parliament at by-elections in order to bring about a cessation of the scandal at Rotherham, which is bringing this House and the Armed Services into public contempt?
Has the right hon. Gentleman noticed the Motion standing in my name and the names of 60 other hon. Members on the question of railway superannuitants? As a statement about a settlement of the question was understood to be pending, is the right hon. Gentleman likely to be able to give us any news about this before Christmas?
[That this House welcomes the statement of the Government that it will introduce a new Pensions (Increase) Bill for public service pensioners, notes that the last Act was widely drawn to include most public service pensioners but that it still failed to bring in certain groups, such as railway superannuitants and former colonial servants, who have the same moral claims to recognition, and therefore urges Her Majesty's Government to devise ways and means of extending the benefits of its proposed legislation to all who have served the Government at home and abroad and who find that their pensions fail to match both the rise in the cost of living and comparable pensions now awarded for similar service.]
May I add a further plea to that made by my hon. Friend the Member for Torquay (Mr. F. M. Bennett) and the Leader of the Liberal Party and ask the Leader of the House, in relation to the intention that the House should rise on Friday of next week, whether he is aware that many of us would not want to go away for Christmas if there were a danger of Christmas being desecrated by yet another wanton United Nations attack on the people of Katanga?
Referring to the subject of Katanga again—and so that there should be no misunderstanding of the view on the Liberal benches—may I ask the Leader of the House to draw the attention of the Foreign Secretary to a report in the Press today of a statement by an official of the British Consulate in Elisabethville to the effect that Katanga was determined not to surrender and that the whites were ready to blow the whole lot up? Surely it would not help towards a peaceful settlement if Her Majesty's Government appeared to be supporting Katanga in that attitude.
Does the Leader of the House recall that on Wednesday of last week the Report of the Select Committee on House of Lards Reform was ordered to be printed and that it was confidently expected in that Committee that the Report would be ready tomorrow? I can ascertain no firm date when it will be ready, so may we have an assurance that, in his office as Leader of the House, the right hon. Gentleman will take such action as he can to expedite something which we consider has been rather dilatorily done at the moment?
It is rather difficult for me to reply to that question because, naturally, the House as a whole—and I am in no different position at all—has no official knowledge of this Report, or of a similar Report, until it is produced. But it will be a matter of only a few days and, certainly, it will be printed before we rise.
On a point of order. I put it to you, Mr. Speaker, that the Leader of the House is quite off the beam here. Of course he has official knowledge of it. The Report was laid before the House. The Select Committee has finished with it and the House has ordered it to be printed. It is, therefore, the business of the Leader of the House to make inquiries. That is all I am asking him to do. I am merely asking when the Report is likely to be available. I have pointed out the dilatory nature of this business and the fact that it is at variance with the understanding we had. I merely asked the right hon. Gentleman to do something about it.
I shall be very glad to look into this matter. So far as the almost constitutional point which the hon. Member makes is concerned, I am not sure that I necessarily agree with his analysis. Perhaps he will let me study it.
While we are awaiting the statement by the Minister of Defence on his talks with Mr. McNamara, will the right hon. Gentleman try to arrange to have an urgent statement made on Skybolt, which might serve to clarify the situation at the conference in Paris, where, according to a report on the B.B.C. today, news correspondents are being given diametrically opposite and mutually hostile briefings by the British and American spokesmen?
The hon. Member knows that statements on Fridays are always unsatisfactory. That is why I have given an undertaking that this statement would be made during the first day or two of next week.
[That this House, conscious of the necessary changes under the rating revaluation of premises due to come into force in April, 1963, believes that the time has now arrived for the rate burden to be spread more fairly amongst all citizens, for the financing of education to be transferred, by stages, to the national Exchequer, whilst retaining local control, and for a full inquiry into possible new methods of raising revenue for local government services.]
In support of what was said by the hon. Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan) about a statement by the Minister of Power on the proposed, or suggested, take-over in the steel industry, would the Leader of the House urge very strongly upon the Minister of Power that he should make a statement about this most sinister possibility as early as possible during the week?
Will he also tell us when he proposes to take the Motion for the Adjournment of the House in case, by any chance, the Minister of Power has not made his statement prior to that moment?
I understand that it is proposed to take that Motion on Tuesday. On the first point, I am very willing to make representations or to inform my right hon. Friend of the representations that have been made in the House, although, clearly, it is for him to decide whether he should make a statement or not.
Could the Leader of the House tell us when he proposes to arrange for a debate on the Motion standing in the names of several right hon. and hon. Members on this side of the House, calling for a Select Committee to inquire into the conduct of the Government during the Cuban crisis? Is it not time that we had a debate to examine how the Government betrayed the people of this country during that period?
[That this House, noting the statement of the Foreign Secretary that, during the height of the Cuban crisis, the world was faced with the prospect of nuclear war; noting also the statement of the Prime Minister that at the climax of the crisis he assured President Kennedy of the full support of the British Government, thus exposing the people of Britain to the danger of annihilation without representation; calls for the appointment of a Select Committee to investigate the conduct of the Government in relation to the Cuban crisis, with particular reference to the working, during this period, of the arrangement for dual Anglo-American control of United States nuclear bases in Britain and of the general understanding for joint consultation on the use of American or British nuclear weapons anywhere in the world, and to make recommendations on the future use of American nuclear bases in British territory and on the political control of nuclear weapons by the members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation alliance.]
[That this House, in view of the dismal propects for television manufacturers and component makers in areas of unemployment in the United Kingdom and in view of the fruitful research being carried out at the Mearnskirk Thompson Institute into educational television programmes in mathematics and English language for pupils in developing countries of the Commonwealth, urges Her Majesty's Government to present two television sets to each secondary school and one television set to each primary school over the next 16 months in areas of the Commonwealth and Colonies where educational programmes are being transmitted.]
On a point of order. May I take it that what the hon. Member for Tavistock (Sir H. Studholme) has said about a Written Question does not rule out my request for a statement to be made to the House?
Yes, Mr. Speaker, but, with respect, the hon. Member for Tavistock has referred to the fact that he has put down a Question for Written Answer. This cannot be discussed in the House, and I am asking whether the Leader of the House will arrange for a statement to be made in the House next week on this major disturbance in the prison?
I thought that that was the Question which the hon. Member had asked, and that it had been answered. The hon. Member for Dudley (Mr. Wigg) will be in order now in pursuing the matter which he raised with me.