HC Deb 04 May 1960 vol 622 cc1173-4
Mr. Walker-Smith

I beg to move, in page 12, line 14, to leave out "two" and to insert "three".

The effect of the Amendment is to increase the quorum of the Privy Council for the purpose of exercising any powers under the Act from two, as proposed in the original Bill, to three. In Committee the hon. Member for St. Pancras, North (Mr. K. Robinson) moved to increase the number to four. I think he pointed out then that there was a disadvantage in having a quorum of only two, in that there are in fact two Ministers of Health, because my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland is the Minister of Health in Scotland. That would have the disadvantage that any decision of the Privy Council could be taken by the two Departmental Ministers primarily concerned.

We have sought to meet that point. On the other hand, it would not be appropriate to fix the quorum for this purpose at four, because the quorum of the Privy Council when Her Majesty is herself in Council is only three, and it would clearly be inapposite to have a larger quorum for this purpose.

Having excluded the possibilities which are inappropriate for one reason or another, we are left, on the Sherlock Holmes principle, with a solution by exclusion, which is to fix the number at three, which is what the Amendment does, and I hope that it commends itself to the House.

Mr. K. Robinson

I was always taught that half a loaf was better than no bread. In this case we have been given precisely half a loaf. In Committee we felt that such were the powers of the Privy Council under the Bill that it would be wrong if it became the practice, as it could have become as the Bill was then drafted, for Privy Council functions to be exercised by the Minister of Health and the Secretary of State for Scotland. Now that the number has been increased from two to three, that is no longer possible, and I hope that it will not lead the right hon. and learned Gentleman to too much inconvenience in the future.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Walker-Smith

I beg to move, in page 12, line 29, to leave out from the beginning to the end of line 31.

This Amendment has already been discussed. It is on the same point as the affirmative Resolution.

Amendment agreed to.