Business of the House

– in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 24th May 1963.

Alert me about debates like this

11.4 a.m.

Photo of Mr Iain Macleod Mr Iain Macleod , Enfield West

Following the exchanges on the Floor of the House yesterday, the business for the next week has been rearranged so that on Monday, 27th May, the business will be:

Remaining stages of the Remuneration of Teachers Bill, and the Local Employment Bill, which it is hoped to obtain by seven o'clock, to allow discussion on the Motion in the name of the Leader of the Opposition in relation to the Home Secretary.

On Tuesday, 28th May the revised business will be:

Finance Bill: Further progress in Committee.

The business for the remainder of the week will be as already announced.

Mr. H. Wilson:

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware—I am sure that he understands this—that it is not possible to give a guarantee about what progress can be made with the Remuneration of Teachers Bill and that we shall have to see how it goes? Secondly, since the exchanges across the Floor of the House yesterday referred to the responsibility not only of the Home Secretary but of the Attorney-General in this matter, and while it is not for us to suggest who should be put up from the Government Front Bench, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman recognises that there will be a feeling in the House that the Attorney-General should also be present to defend his record in the matter?

Photo of Mr Iain Macleod Mr Iain Macleod , Enfield West

The first point about Monday's business is understood. I take note of what the Leader of the Opposition said on the second point.

Photo of Mr Christopher Mayhew Mr Christopher Mayhew , Woolwich East

May I ask about the delay in the Television Bill? Will the Leader of the House realise that the tele- vision programme companies are among the most powerful and mercenary pressure groups in the country, and will he give an assurance that the delay in taking the Television Bill will not lead to further Government Amendments weakening the terms of the Bill in favour of the companies?

Photo of Mr Iain Macleod Mr Iain Macleod , Enfield West

There is no need to make any such assumption. This arises entirely out of a Motion tabled by the Opposition.