§ * LORD NEWTONMy Lords, I rise to call attention to the Resolution adopted 702 by this House on 25th May last year with regard to the Parliamentary session, and to ask His Majesty's Government whether they propose to take any steps with reference to it. Lest there should be any doubt as to the Motion which is referred to in the notice, I may as well explain that the Motion was an attempt on my part to induce Parliament, and, incidentally, society to adopt more reasonable habits, and to conform, in short, to the usual practices of civilised nations by doing such work as we are called upon to do, preferably in the winter to the months of July and August. Although I was temporarily, perhaps I ought to say momentarily, successful in this endeavour, and although I succeeded in obtaining the support of the noble Duke who at that time led this House, I refrained, with great consideration, from pressing the noble Duke on the subject, because I felt some doubt in my own mind as to whether he would continue in this office, and those apprehensions have unfortunately bean justified. Now we are nominally, at all events, at the beginning of another session—I say nominally because I have very little doubt that, in about a fortnight's time, we shall be adjourning indefinitely because we have nothing to do. This being the case, it appears to me that it is time to ask whether anything is going to be done with reference to the Motion adopted by the House.
I have not the smallest intention of repeating the arguments which I advanced last year. They were apparently considered satisfactory, and I own that I do not think that was at all surprising, as I contend they were founded upon good sense. Parliament met last year about the middle of February. This House adjourned, I think, towards the end of March. We practically did not sit at all during April; we sat during a portion of May; we adjourned during a portion of May and June; and we met again towards the middle of June, and until the month of August we were occupied in debating matters of a more or less abstract description and in discussions often of a somewhat desultory character. It was not until August that we had the usual influx of Bills from the Commons, and they were to use an expression which is much in favour with the Front Bench, "dumped" 703 down on tin's House, some of them in a somewhat raw and unfinished condition.
There was only one Bill of really first-class importance last session—namely, the Irish Land Bill. That Bill made its first effective appearance here on 3rd August, upon which day the Second Reading was taken. On 6th August we entered upon the Committee stage; on the first night we wrestled with the technicalities of the Bill until a disreputable hour so far as we are concerned. On 7th August the discussion was continued, and the Committee stage was brought to an end at a late hour in the evening. I want to call particular attention to what occurred on this evening. When we had disposed of the Irish Land Bill we set to work and considered a Fertilisers and Food Stuffs Bill. We then took the Second Beading of the Naval Works Bill, which was introduced in a some what at lengthy speech by the noble Earl the First Lord of the Admiralty. We then embarked upon the Post Office Sites Bill and passed it through Committee. We then took the Second Reading of the Employment of Children Bill—a fairly important measure, which was introduced in an equally long speech by the noble Lord who represents the Home Office; and after that we proceeded to the consideration of the Ireland Development Bill, whatever that may be. Having disposed of that, a noble Lord on this side of the House called attention to the grievances of reserve officers. I had a grievance myself which I was anxious to air against my noble friend the Foreign Secretary, and I always look back upon that night with a feeling of resentment, because, owing to the congested state of the business, I was able to make no impression on my noble friend, when my turn came, and he therefore escaped scot free. This is an instance of the amount of work we crowd into I an August day, or, perhaps, it would be more correct to say, an August evening. 7th August was a Friday. On the following Monday—10th August—we embarked upon a large number of Bills—seven or eight altogether. On 11th August the Irish Land Bill was read a third time and on 12th August the Motor Car Bill was disposed of. On 13th August the noble Earl the Leader of the Opposition put a series 704 of conundrums to the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, embracing all those questions which presumbly he had forgotten to ask at an earlier period of the session; and on 14th August Parliament was prorogued.
To resume for a moment fiscal phraseology I feel inclined to ask—How much longer are we going to take this lying down? The noble Earl on the Cross Benches, Lord Rosebery, whose support I was fortunate enough to obtain, stated that in the month of August this House was annually converted into a dustheap, and he made a bold and drastic suggestion that the House of Lords should go on strike. Not being possessed of the courage and enterprise of the noble Earl I do not advocate such drastic measures. I shudder to contemplate what grave constitutional difficulties would arise if we took that course; but I have a much more conciliatory proposal which I beg to suggest to the noble Marquess. I recognise, myself, as everybody else must do, that we cannot be the sole judges in this matter, and that we cannot consult our own convenience only. It is perfectly obvious that we cannot carry out any change unless we can get the House of Commons to agree with us. What I therefore suggest to my noble friend is this: That he should use his influence with the present Leader of the House of Commons, whoever he may be, and induce him to give facilities for a discussion on a Motion in similar terms to that which has been adopted by this House. We shall then ascertain what the opinion of the House of Commons is upon this question. There is really no reason why a few hours should not be given to the discussion of this subject in the House of Commons, because at this time of the year that House has some spare time on its hands.
If the proposal is accepted—and I personally entertain a strong belief that it only requires to be talked about sufficiently in order to be adopted, and that the House of Commons will find that it suits their convenience as much as it does ours—wed and good; if, on the other hand, they reject it, there is an end, at all events for the time being, of the matter. But what I do respectfully desire to impress upon the noble Marquess 705 is that it really is necessary that something should be done, because if we are going airily to pass Resolutions, by large majorities, of this character and take no action upon them, we are really justifying the statement—the somewhat libellous statement—which is made about us, that we are little better than a collection of persons of more or less social eminence who meet here for the purpose of airing their individual opinions.
§ * THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEMy Lords, I had not the advantage of being in your Lordships' House last year when my noble friend introduced this subject, but I had an opportunity of reading the statement which he made, and I am bound to say that I thought his arguments were of the most convincing kind. At any rate, if he had desired again to take the sense of your Lordships' House, I certainly should have voted with him. My noble friend, I think, rests his case upon the true ground. We hear a great many arguments in favour of an earlier prorogation of Parliament which do not appeal very much to us. I suppose we would all of us like to see more of the country at a time when the country is at its best; but London, after all, is not a very intolerable place even in the dog days, and we can scarely, I think, on grounds of private convenience, ask to have the customs of Parliament changed. Nor am I greatly impressed by the argument connected with field sports which is sometimes addressed to us. I agree with what was said as to this last year by Lord Kibbles-dale: even with an autumn session there would be plenty of opportunities for those who wished to pursue either a sporting life diversified by politics, or a political life diversified by sport. The real reason, it seems to me, for a change of this kind is that which my noble friend has stated—I mean the fact that the present system does not enable the House of Lords to perform adequately and efficiently the duties which belong to it under our Constitutional system.
I have now for a great number of years watched events in this House; and I am bound to say it seems to me almost a scandal that, year after year, important matters 706 of business should be crowded before us in the dying moments of the session, when we are all of us more or less exhausted, and when it is quite impossible for this House either to consider, as it should consider, the Amendments which I may have been introduced in any measure in the other House of Parliament during the later stages of its progress, or even those Amendments which are put upon the Paper by Members of your Lordships' House. The result, I am afraid, is that a great deal of our legislative work is very badly done, and that we not infrequently place upon the Statute-book, as we certainly did last year in the case of the Irish Land Bill, measures which in some important respects do not carry out the intentions of their framers. Therefore, my Lords, I am quite disposed to view favourably the proposal of my noble friend. Probably the most serious thing that can be said against it is this, that it will add considerably to the troubles of Ministers and their subordinates during the winter months, which is the season of the year when measures should be carefully matured, and there is no doubt that work of that kind cannot be carried on so satisfactorily if business is liable to all those interruptions which are inseparable from the session of Parliament.
But, my Lords, as I said a moment ago, I wish nothing but well to my noble friend's proposal, and if I could advance it in any way I should be glad to do so. The noble Duke who spoke last year on behalf of the Government made it perfectly clear that the question was one in which the other House of Parliament had not only an equal interest with our House, but, as he put it, a preponderating interest, and my noble friend evidently feels that we have to reckon with the House of Commons in this matter. I will, however, gladly impart to the Prime Minister what has been said by my noble friend, and I have no doubt my right hon. friend will receive the communication with the respect to which it is entitled, considering the quarter from which it emanates. But whether it will be possible to find time in the House of Commons for a debate upon a 707 point of this kind is a question which it is impossible for me to answer.
§ LORD TWEEDMOUTHMy Lords, it seems to me absolutely impossible that we can meet the noble Lord's point by any arrangement that may be made. I understand the noble Lord's point to be that this House is badly treated in having to deal at the end of the session with all the measures which come up to it from the House of Commons. Whatever arrangement may be made with regard to the sittings of Parliament the same thing will occur; the earlier portion of the session will always be taken up in the House of Commons by financial matters and with business which does not advance the legislation of the session very much. The only remedy, it seems to me, which will meet the noble Lord's objection is that the Government of the day should introduce some of their more important measures in this House, and let your Lordships have the opportunity of having the first "go" at them. To propose any such thing is rather a counsel of perfection. I am afraid that no Government of any complexion is likely to take that course. The House of Commons, I think, will always insist on having the main measures brought before them first, and as a great many of the measures are in their very nature of a financial character it is imperative that they should be first introduced into the other House. I am afraid, therefore, that the noble Lord's proposal is not likely to lead to the result he desires.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERYMy Lords, I am afraid we do not get much assistance from my noble friend who has just sat down. I do not think I ever remember a session in which it was not proposed to the Government that they should introduce some of their important measures in this House. I am a little disappointed that the Government have not adopted their favourite remedy of a Select Committee to consider this question. My noble friend Lord Newton has rather pointedly alluded to the ironical proposition I made last year that the House of Lords should go out on strike. I am disposed to reconsider that 708 proposal from the experience we had last year. If the House of Commons is to be conducted on the principles on which it was conducted last year, I see great value in the House of Lords sitting continuously and pari passu with the House of Commons, as being the only arena for free discussion which remains to us in this country; for your Lordships will remember that this House was the only House in which the policy of His Majesty's Government was allowed to be discussed during the whole of last session. The Government, which is the guardian of the privileges of this House, and which does not simply regard it as the only arena for free discussion left to us, has, I am afraid, treated a solemn Resolution of this House, passed by an adequate majority, with some neglect. It was passed very nearly a year ago, and I am sorry to learn, from what has fallen from the noble Marquess, that the Government have taken no proceedings on that Resolution and have allowed it to fall entirely into abeyance. What worse thing could be said against an advanced Liberal Government than that they had disregarded altogether a Resolution of this House, and treated it as waste paper? I confess that I find myself once more, as I have sometimes found myself, to my astonishment, of late years, the guardian of the privileges of this House, the asserter of the dignity of this House; and I should have been glad if, simply out of regard for those great objects, the Government had thought well to refer this matter to a Select Committee.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGHThere has always seemed to me one suggestion for remedying the undoubted evils from which we suffer which never seems to receive sufficient consideration. I think there are very great difficulties in securing the object which the noble Lord has in view by meeting earlier in the year and promising not to sit later. My belief is that, however early you meet, you will sit on to that period of the year when long stereotyped custom makes it pleasant to leave the Metropolis. But I would offer one suggestion which, I think, would have the result of restoring a great deal of the privileges of this House, add very greatly to the convenience of everybody 709 concerned, and in no way prejudice the public interest. It is that in regard, at any rate, to some of the Bills which come up from the House of Commons we should carry them over to a subsequent session. The prejudice against that proposal is not altogether wise. In the case of private measures, Bills are sometimes carried over from one Parliament to another, and there is no abstract constitutional difficulty in adopting the course I have suggested in regard to those public Bills which are not of first-class importance.
§ LORD NEWTONMy Lords, with the permission of the House, I wish to say a very few words in reply to the observations of Lord Tweedmouth. His contention was that, whatever happened, we should get these Bills at the fag end of the session. My objection is that at present we get them up in August, when no one remains in town. If the session ended in December there would be no difficulty in securing an adequate attendance of Peers.