§ Q7. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Prime Minister if he will initiate interparty talks with a view to legislation on the problems of the composition, powers, and functions of a second Chamber of Parliament.
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir.
§ Mr. HamiltonIs my right hon. Friend aware that we are getting a bit tired of these dusty answers whenever we raise this question? Does not he recognise that the present constitution of the other place is a continuous affront to all true democrats, particularly those on this side? If he is not prepared to enter into consultations with the other party, will he forthwith get rid of the hereditary element in the other place?
§ The Prime MinisterI am well aware of my hon. Friend's feeling about this matter, and indeed I am probably aware of some of the reasons for his feelings. [interruption.] My hon. Friend is a Scottish Member: he is well aware of the power of feudalism in that country. As I have said to my hon. Friend on a previous occasion, I believe that there is no general or united desire in the House as a whole, or even on this side, that we should start examining the question of the composition of their Lordships' House. What we are, and must be, concerned with—and this was the 1442 only issue on which my hon. Friend and I and others fought the election in our manifesto—is the danger of another place interfering with decisions of this elected Chamber.
§ Mr. LubbockWill not the Prime Minister at least recognise that there is general agreement on all sides that the hereditary principle is outdated and must go? Will he not, therefore, see whether this is not the starting point for discussions on the lines proposed by his hon. Friend?
§ The Prime MinisterI well understand the hon. Member's concern, too, about the dangers of the hereditary peerage. All I can say to him is that, since the present Government was formed, no hereditary peerages or baronetcies have been created.
§ Mr. Gwilym RobertsIs my right hon. Friend aware that there is a strong feeling on this side of the House that interparty discussion in this matter could achieve very little and that, if we are to get reform in this place and in that other place, the Government should be prepared to act unilaterally and to act now?
§ The Prime MinisterThe question of any actions taken in respect of another place is really a matter of legislative priorities, and I could think of more important priorities for the legislative programme. If, however, there were to be any move forward in these matters, at least we could all agree on the question of the powers of another place to frustrate decisions of this House. There might be a lot of disagreement about the composition of another place.
§ Mr. WoodburnIs my right hon. Friend aware that in the conversations that have previously taken place to try to deal with this problem, nobody has yet found the solution of altering the composition of the House of Lords without strengthening its powers and that this House has always been very reluctant to add any powers, either moral or otherwise, to the House of Lords by altering its composition?
§ The Prime MinisterI should be very surprised if in this day and age any hon. Member of the House wanted to increase the powers of another place—that, I should have thought, was uncontroversial 1443 —or, indeed, to alter the influence of another place. I am sure that the trend of future years must be to reduce the powers of another place because of the danger, particularly in the concluding years of a Parliament in which the House of Commons did not have a Conservative majority, that the decision of the people expressed in an election could be frustrated by unilateral action in another place.