An hon. Member:
Oh yes, we have.
Subtopic: PRECEDENCE OF GOVERNMENT BUSINESS ON MONDAYS
Oh yes, we have.
Temper, temper, temper.
As Hansard does not record all this constant interruption, I wish to make it quite clear that when an argument is being presented with respect to the rights of private members there is nothing but a continuous uproar from members who apparently do not believe that private members should have any further rights in the house.
That is not the cause of the uproar.
I should also like to indicate for the record that the noise has come exclusively from members who are supporters of the government.
Mr. Brown (Essex West):
The house will proceed with the debates under way and will proceed with the business-
Is that an order?
-if there is some direction and guidance given by the government as to what business is going to come before the house. I wish to ask at -this time for an assurance from the Prime Minister-
You will get it.
I hope I shall get it. May I say in response to the most recent interruption that I hope there will be an undertaking from the Prime Minister that no second session this year will be contemplated-
We do not want it.
-and carefully planned frustration that has rendered so much of the debate ineffective-
Sounds like a confession.
The time of confession for the hon. member will come later in this discussion, provided he feels himself free to take advantage of that opportunity. The subject now before the house does relate to the point I have raised. There can be no excuse for a second session this year-
No one suggested it.
Who suggested it?
-and I repeat that I hope the Prime Minister will give the unqualified assurance that there will be no second session this year, always subject to those emergencies which have no relation to the ordinary business of this house. I am raising this question now because last year we did have a wholly unnecessary second session-