FOOD AND DRUGS AMENDMENT BILL [H.L.] (Hansard, 22 November 1954)

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (VISCOUNT WOOLTON)
My Lords, in moving that the Commons Amendments be now considered, I beg permission of your Lordships to make a personal statement. When this Bill was being considered in another place Mr. Willey said that I was in charge of it, and that it was common knowledge that I had considerable interests in the catering industry. He suggested that constitutional issues were raised when the Minister in charge of the Bill had these well-recognised interests, and he said it was very disquieting that it was in connection with the catering industry, and that industry alone, that exceptions had been made. He added that, so far as was known, no recommendations had come from anywhere apart from this particular section of the food trades. The House will know that I am not, in fact, in charge of the Bill, except in your Lordships' House, that constitutionally the Minister of Food, and he alone, is in charge of it and, within his rights, has made such alterations as he thought fit.
For purposes of record, and in order to answer the personal imputation of being actuated by improper motives, I beg to inform the House that I was neither consulted nor informed by the Minister, either personally or in Ministerial discussions more generally, about any of the detailed alterations to which Mr. Willey has referred, and I knew 1684 nothing about them until I read the OFFICIAL REPORT. The suggestion, therefore, that I used improper influence is completely false, and I regret that Mr. Willey should have suggested that any personal financial interests of mine have affected Government policy. Of course, my interests in the catering trade are confined to those of a shareholder and, in fact, they are comparatively small. I hardly think that your Lordships will feel the matter to be of sufficient moment to make it necessary for me to defend myself against imputations of this kind.

§ EARL JOWITT
My Lords, I feel perfectly certain that all your Lordships, in whatever quarter of the House you may sit, will accept most readily the assurances which the noble Viscount has given.

§ VISCOUNT WOOLTON
I am very grateful to the noble and learned Earl. I felt that the circumstances were such that I had to make that statement.
To come now to the Bill, the Amendments from another place which I have to put before you to-day are voluminous, and I have been at some concern as to how most rapidly to get through them for the convenience of the whole House. If your Lordships will agree, I propose to group them together, because in many cases the Amendments that are submitted have also consequential Amendments in other parts of the Bill. If it be your Lordships' pleasure, I think it will save time if my noble friend Lord Carrington—who has been good enough to help me with this rather heavy task—and I submit to you groups of Amendments. Of course, while we shall make but one speech on each group—which may be to your Lordships' advantage—your Lordships will deal with the Amendments as you think fit and they will, of course, be put separately. I now beg to move that the Commons Amendments to the Bill be now considered.

§ EARL JOWITT
My Lords, before we pass that Motion may I make this suggestion? We have here a mass of Amendments, and I think it would be much better if in future we had the Amendments numbered. When I was Lord Chancellor that was one of the reforms which I initiated. I think it was very 1685 valuable. Instead of having to refer to, it may be, "page 3, line 77," and so on, we were then enabled to say simply, "Amendment No. 1," or whatever it might be. I would suggest for the consideration of your Lordships and of the Officers of this House, who are always ready to consider suggestions, that in future, even if Amendments come from the Commons, for our own convenience we should number them as we do our own Amendments.

§ LORD SILKIN
My Lords, on the suggestion which the noble Viscount, Lord Woolton has just made, may I say this? I do not know whether within the Rules of Order we cart, as it were, jump about on the Order Paper. I do not know whether that was the intention; but it might be very inconvenient. We do not want to prolong the debate on these Commons Amendments, and if the noble Lord who moves an Amendment can refer at the same time to the consequential Amendments, we can then take them as they come on the Order Paper. When we come to an Amendment, which is indicated as being consequential we can just accept it.