HL Deb 14 July 1924 vol 58 cc535-6

THE LORD CHANCELLOR had the following Notice on the Paper:

To move, in order to bring the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act, 1921, into operation, to resolve, That it is expedient that a tribunal be established for inquiring into a matter of urgent public importance, that is to say—

  1. 1. The existing law and administrative machinery in England and Wales in connection with the certification, detention and care of persons who are or are alleged to be of unsound mind.
  2. 2. The extent to which provision is or should be made in England and Wales for the treatment without certification of persons suffering from mental disorder.

The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, I should tell you that this Motion does not involve any question of policy. The question is whether there should be an Inquiry into this subject, and it will be done by a Royal Commission. The only purport of the Motion is that the Royal Commission, when set up, shall be given those powers which the Statute mentioned, the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act, 1921, confers, so that the Commission shall have power to call witnesses and take evidence on oath. The other House has passed a similar Motion, and I now ask your Lordships to pass it.

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

My Lords, the noble and learned Viscount has told us that this Motion is simply to enable the Royal Commission to examine witnesses on oath, but he has not explained to us why it is suggested that a Royal Commission should be set up to go into this matter. You will, perhaps, recollect that last year I had the honour to submit a Bill dealing with the subject connected with the matter to be investigated by the Royal Commission. That Bill was accepted by your Lordships, and passed through all its stages. Since then the Government has changed, and the present Government is proposing to set up a Royal Commission. I think the names of the members of the Commission have been announced in another place. I do not know whether it is convenient to ask the noble and learned Viscount for a little more information as to the reasons which have led the Government to take the course proposed.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

Your Lordships will remember that since the events which the noble Earl has mentioned we have had the trouble arising in the Harnett case, in which the Court of Appeal took a different view from that taken in the Court of First Instance. The Judges of the Court of Appeal thought that there were matters which required investigation, and it has been thought right to appoint a Royal Commission for the purpose.

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

I thought that might be the explanation.

On Question, Motion agreed to.