ADJOURNMENT OF COMMONS

Dominion, Volume 32, Issue 258, 29 July 1939, Page 11

ADJOURNMENT OF COMMONS

Questioning Wisdom Of Long Recess 'PRIME MINISTER’S ASSURANCE (British Official Wireless.) RUGBY, July 27. The Prime Minister, Mr. Chamberlain, replying to a question in the House of Commons by Mr. Arthur Greenwood (Labour), said that the adjournment of Parliament for the summer recess would be taken on Friday of next week. He would announce next week the date of reassembly, and lie intimated that the motion _ for the summer adjournment contain the usual provision for the earlier recall of Parliament if necessary.

Mr. Greenwood asked if Mr. Chamberlain had given consideration to a suggestion that there should be regular meetings of the House during the recess, and that they should not disperse for a considerable period in view of public anxiety over the international situation.

Mr. Chamberlain replied that it did not seem to him an advisable course to pursue; it would be likely to keep the xvhole country in a state, of anxiety. Mr. Greenwood then suggested that, on the contrary, it was more likely to give a feeling of satisfaction and to strengthen public opinion were it known that the House met from time to time.

Mr. Chamberlain said that this was a matter of opinion, but his opinion was that the powers which the Government already possessed were sufficient.

x Watch Developments.

Sir Archibald Sinclair (Liberal) said that in view of the possibility of grave events abroad, surely it was undesirable for the House to separate for any prolonged period. If the Premier found himself unable to accept the suggestion made by Mr. Greenwood that the House should meet regularly in the interval, would he at any rate agree that the House should not adjourn for several weeks, but that it should adjourn for not more than a fortnight or for three weeks at most?

Mr. Chamberlain answered that he bad no reason to suppose that if grave events supervened they should supervene in a fortnight or three weeks, or at any particular time. The only reasonable or sensible course was that the Government, which had the responsibility, should watch the course of events, and the House might depend upon it that the Government would exercise its powers with a due sense of responsibility. Further questioned by Mr. Greenwood, Mr, Chamberlain said: “I do not want to tie myself down to the precise words of a pledge, but, broadly speaking, if the Government contemplates some departure in its foreign policy, and I understand it is foreign policy which is in question, I think it would be an occasion for calling the House together.”