AGE OF MAJORITY (LATEY COMMITTEE'S REPORT) (Hansard, 10 April 1968)

§ The Attorney-General (Sir Elwyn Jones)
As soon as Parliamentary time can be found, the Government hope to introduce legislation to implement most of the recommendations made by the Latey Committee on the Age of Majority, whose Report (Cmnd. 3342) was presented to Parliament in July 1967.
The Committee considered the law relating to minors in England and Wales and unanimously recomended that most of the present limits on full capacity in civil law should be removed for persons between the ages of 18 and 21, and nine out of 11 members of the Committee recommended that all such limits should be removed.
1402 Having carefully considered the Committee's proposals as well as the debates in this House on 20th November and in another place on 22nd November, 1967, the Government have decided that it would be right to reduce the age of majority to 18 and in general they propose to follow the recommendations of the majority of the Committee.
The legislation to be introduced will reduce from 21 to 18 the age at which a person has full powers to enter into a binding contract, to give a valid receipt and to hold and dispose of property. The minimum age for making a will, for acting as a trustee or personal representative, for acquiring an independent domicile and for consenting to the giving of blood will also be 18. The need for parental or court consent to the marriage 1403 of a person between the ages of 18 and 21 will also be removed; and the powers of the courts to make adoption orders, to award custody of and access to children and to make them wards of court up to the age of 21 will be similarly curtailed. Certain other amendments to the law affecting minors will also be made, including a statutory power for a minor of 16 or over to consent to medical or dental treatment including blood tests.
Certain of the recommendations of the Report will not be covered by this legislation: any changes in the law of taxation, for example, will have to be dealt with in a Finance Bill. Moreover, some of the more detailed recommendations are still being studied. The intended legislation will not affect the age of voting, which was outside the Committee's terms of reference and concerning which the Speaker's Conference on Electoral Law has recently reported.
The House may also wish to know that, in accordance with the recommendations of the Latey Committee, my noble Friend, the Lord Chancellor, has asked the Law Commission to consider the Committee's proposals for substantive changes in the law of infants' contracts and the structural changes in the courts which they suggested. These two topics fit conveniently into the Commission's first and second programmes.
The Latey Committee's inquiry was, of course, confined to England and Wales: in many respects minors in Scotland are already free from the restrictions which apply to young persons under English law. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland is at presnt considering whether legislation is required to amend the law of Scotland in relation to minors.

§ Sir P. Rawlinson
The Attorney-General will doubtless appreciate that the Bill will be complex. Will he assure the House that it will be printed in good time before we have a debate and before it is presented to Parliament? Can he tell us when it might be presented to Parliament? Thirdly, does he appreciate that, if the Bill contains the proposals he has outlined, the Bill will deal with property and marriage at the age of 18? The Speaker's Conference has recommended the age of 20 for voting, 1404 and the Law Commission is invited to look at infants' contracts and the courts. Would it not be much more sensible law reform for all these matters to be put together in a comprehensive Bill?

§ The Attorney-General
I do not think so. With regard to the last part of the submission of the right hon. and learned Gentleman, the recommendations of the Latey Committee on the matters about which legislation is proposed are self-contained and are a measure of law reform which I think is necessary and for which there is a good deal of demand. I can give the right hon. Gentleman an assurance that there will be abundant time for consideration of a Bill before it is debated. I cannot give the date of the expected publication of the Bill, but it will not be for some time.

§ Mr. Mendelson
Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that there will be a general welcome to the announcement he has made on behalf of the Government, and that many young people have already expressed their opinion that they hope that the Government will act in this way? The younger generation will be very disappointed that the Government have not announced at the same time that they will bring the voting age into line with the age recommended by the Latey Committee for the other heavy responsibilities. The Government will have to address itself to the question. Young people who are to be able to conclude a contract in law and to do all these other things, surely ought to have a right to take part in political decisions.

§ The Attorney-General
The Government are addressing themselves to the question, but the process of examination has not yet been completed. It is not long since the Report of the Speaker's Conference on Electoral Law was received. It is obviously a very serious and important matter which requires further consideration.

§ Mr. Grieve
While the House will appreciate that the Attorney-General is unable to go into all the fiscal consequences of the proposal to reduce the age of majority to 18, will he nevertheless assure us that, in the light of his statement, there can now be no question of aggregating with the incomes of their parents the incomes of children over 18?

§ The Attorney-General
As I said, any matters affecting taxation are matters for the Finance Bill and are not within the ambit of the statement that I have made or the proposed Bill arising from the Latey Committee's Report.

§ Mr. C. Pannell
Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that there is nothing sacred about the age of 18? Will he bear in mind, contrary to what another speaker at the Speaker's Conference has said, that it was by an overwhelming majority, with only one dissentient, that we decided that the age be 20, and that, when considering a situation in which people decide their own personal affairs, it may be right to settle on the age of 18, but that when considering the general corporate affairs of the country, the age of 20 is more sensible?

§ The Attorney-General
While I appreciate that there is nothing sacred about the age of 18, if I may say so, there is nothing sacred either about the age of 21 or 20. But there are important public considerations arising which I venture to think need further examination by all parties in the House.

§ Mr. Lubbock
If every other restriction on the affairs of a young person between the ages of 20 and 21 is to be removed, from the giving of blood to buying a house, including contracts entered into by them which are covered by legislation passed by this House, would it not be totally unacceptable for the Government to introduce legislation without removing the restrictions on young persons to take part in political activities? Will he announce the Government's conclusions on the Speaker's Conference on Electoral Law, before the recommendations reach this House—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Questions must be reasonably brief.

§ Mr. Lubbock
Will the legislation include provisions laying down that boys press-ganged into the Forces by rosy advertising may opt out at the age of 18?

§ The Attorney-General
On the hon. Gentleman's last question, while I do not accept his colourful language, the Government have announced that they are studying whether a satisfactory solution can be found to meet both the future defence needs of the country and the principles underlying the Latey Committee's 1406 recommendations. As to the hon. Gentleman's general submission, as I say, the proposals that I have made are an important self-contained measure and what I think is a much needed change in the law which can be done conveniently without necessarily involving consequences about the voting age. As to that, as I say, the matter is an important one for the future of this democracy. The Government are giving it urgent consideration, and the factors which the hon. Gentleman has mentioned will no doubt be considered both by the Government and by the House when this important matter comes to be debated in due course.

§ Mr. James Griffiths
Like my hon. Friends, I warmly welcome what my right hon. and learned Friend has just said. Bearing in mind that it is now over 20 years ago that this House decided for the purpose of our social insurance scheme that persons should be treated as adults both for contributions and for benefits at the age of 18, and bearing in mind, too, that for the purposes which my hon. and learned Friend has outlined again they will be treated as adults, does he not agree that the case for the vote at the age of 18 is overwhelming?

§ The Attorney-General
I can only repeat what I have said several times. This matter is under active consideration by the Government.

§ Sir Knox Cunningham
Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman—[HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."]—agree that these very important and sweeping changes would be better made on one occasion by United Kingdom legislation?

§ The Attorney-General
The law of Scotland is quite separate from that of England on this matter, and it seemed appropriate to deal with the law of Scotland quite separately.

§ Sir Knox Cunningham
And Northern Ireland.

§ Dr. Miller
Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the Government are to be congratulated on realising the increasing part that young people play in the affairs of our country and that this step will be warmly welcomed in the knowledge that the 1407 giving of responsibility does a tremendous amount towards making responsible citizens? But will he not look closely at the point made by other hon. Members about giving the vote to young people at the age of 18?

§ The Attorney-General
I am grateful for the first part of my hon. Friend's observations, and I have already dealt several times with the second part.

§ Mr. Gower
In imposing new contractual obligations, duties and rights on young people of 18, will the Government take account of the fact that many of them are not in receipt of permanent incomes, and will they take account of such matters as parental responsibility? Will all these points be dealt with in the forthcoming legislation?

§ The Attorney-General
As I have said, the problem of infants' contracts will be referred to the Law Commission. The legislation will be confined to the matters which I mentioned in my statement.

§ Mr. Whitaker
Does not my right hon. and learned Friend agree with the principle of no taxation without representation, and about the unfairness of young people being expected to give their lives for their country in times of war without being able to vote on the policies relating thereto? Does he not consider that it is in the interests of society that young people have a democratic right to express their opinions rather than being frustrated when they feel strongly about matters of policy?

§ The Attorney-General
The Latey Committee did not have the voting age as one of its terms of reference. My statement has been confined to matters arising out of the Latey Report. I can only repeat that the considerations which my hon. Friend has mentioned will be borne in mind by the Government in coming to a decision on the voting age.

§ Mr. Buchanan-Smith
Can the Attorney-General say when his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland will complete his consideration and bring forward his proposals? Is he aware that the Secretary of State may be very able so far as consideration is concerned, but is not so noted for his ability to come to a decision?

§ The Attorney-General
I do not accept the last part of the hon. Gentleman's observation. The alacrity with which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State makes his decisions and acts is well known to all parts of the House. But I am afraid that I cannot say when his proposals will be brought forward.

§ Mr. Strauss
Will my right hon. and learned Friend bear in mind that the Latey Committee specially reported that the arguments which appeared to it to be overwhelming in recommending a reduction of the age to 18 for the various matters with which it was concerned did not apply to other matters such as voting, and that Mr. Speaker's all-party Conference, after very long and careful consideration, decided by a majority of 24 to 1 that 20 was the most appropriate age?

§ Mr. Mendelson
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is very important that it should be realised as a matter of fact that the terms of reference of the Latey Committee excluded its being in a position to deal with this problem. That is the real truth of the position.

§ Mr. Speaker
That is a point of information, not a point of order.