§ 35. Dr. Dickson Mabonasked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he intends to take in the present Session to reform the law of Scotland regarding intestate succession.
§ 39. Mr. Oswaldasked the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to introduce legislation during this Session to amend the present law relating to intestacy.
§ Mr. NobleI lhave nothing to add to the reply that I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for Stirling and Falkirk Burghs (Mr. Malcolm MacPherson)
§ Dr. MabonAfter ten years of the excuse that there is no Parliamentary time for this reform, it is wearing a bit thin. Hon. Members of the House have continued to offer every facility for the speedy passage of a Bill, and would do so. If it is not obstruction by our side of the House which is holding up a Bill is there among the right hon. Gentleman's supporters a vested interest which is preventing a Bill being passed?
§ Mr. NobleI merely said in my reply that I could not guarantee that I would be able to bring a Bill in this Session. I quite agree with the hon. Gentleman that this is an important problem. It is not, however, as urgent as some other things in the legislative programme.
§ Miss HerbisonSurely the Secretary of State is aware that his Government had this in the Queen's Speech two years ago? We on this side of the House and the women in Scotland want to know what has changed the mind of the Government. If it is not Parliamentary time, what else is it? May I give the assurance to the Secretary of State that if he will bring in legislation to give justice 974 to so many women in Scotland we on this side of the House will co-operate in every way possible to get it through quickly?
§ Mr. NobleI am grateful to the hon. Lady for her offer. This, however, is the problem not of one particular section of the community against another. It involves complicated legal proceedings. If time does become available I shall be most grateful to accept the hon. Lady's undertaking.
§ Mr. Hector HughesDoes not the Secretary of State realise that his reply that it was Parliamentary time which prevents this very necessary reform for being implemented is entirely wrong, because within the last two years I introduced a Private Member's Bill on this subject, and I was frustrated by every possible means by the Government? Will the right hon. Gentleman review that situation, and now that there is a new Lord Advocate in office—[HON. MEMBERS: "Where is he?"]—do something to give every facility for the bringing in of a Private Member's Bill such as I sought to have passed two years ago?
§ Mr. NobleI repeat that this is not a question of Parliamentary time; it is a question of getting various people who have had serious views about this to produce something which will improve Scottish law.
§ Mr. RossIf it is not a question of Parliamentary time, will the Secretary of State tell me why he wrote in a letter which I received this morning:
I cannot give any indication of the possibility of finding time for a Bill on this subject."?
§ Mr. NobleI should have thought the reason for that answer was perfectly simple. At the moment we have a fairly large legislative programme, and until one can deal with the more urgent matters it is impossible to guarantee whether there is time or not.