THE LORD PRIVY SEAL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (THE MARQUESS OF CREWE)My Lords, I stated to the House on Saturday that I proposed to make the Notion which your Lordships will see on the Paper. As regards the form of the Motion, it appears to leave the whole action in the hands of my noble and learned friend on the Woolsack. But I think it is only fair to him to state that the House certainly will not suppose that he is likely to use this particular power in an indiscriminate way. I am able to state on his behalf that he would not take this step without consultation with myself and others on this Front Bench, and also without consultation with the noble Marquess opposite and those who are immediately associated with him. I should hope that there is no probability, so far as we can judge, that this power is likely to be needed; but owing to the circumstances which I mentioned when I raised the subject the day before yesterday I think the House will agree that it is desirable that we should have this power in hand.
§ Moved to resolve, That whenever during the present Session of Parliament the House stands adjourned for more than two days, and it appears to the satisfaction of the Lord Chancellor that the public interest requires that the House should meet at any earlier time during such adjournment the Lord Chancellor may give notice to the Peers that he is so satisfied, and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice and shall transact its business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time.—(The Marquess of Crewe.)
THE EARL OF CRAWFORDMy Lords, I do not understand why it is necessary to make this Motion in the House of Lords and not in the House of Commons. There is no such Motion on the Order Paper of the House of Commons to-day. Consequently that House will only be able to meet, prior to August 25, under the Statute of George III, which allows, by the agency of Royal Proclamation, a summons to be issued at six days' notice. By this Motion, therefore, we are taking power to meet four days earlier than could the House of Commons. What is the object of that? I confess I am not completely 484 satisfied by the statement of the noble Marquess, and I am inclined to think, after the words of caution which he used at the outset, that in the absence of any similar power being conferred upon the House of Commons it might be well if his suggestion were put into a more concrete form and the assent of the Leader of the Opposition combined to that of the Lord Chancellor, or, perhaps, better still, to that of the Chairman of Committees, who is appointed by this House and corresponds to the Speaker of the House of Commons much more than a member of the Cabinet sitting upon the Woolsack can do. Perhaps the Lord Chairman might be associated with the Lord Chancellor in this matter. I throw that out as a tentative suggestion. I do not propose to move to that effect, as perhaps the noble Marquess will do so himself. But I think we should know why this House is to be summonable at two days' notice and the House of Commons at six.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNMy Lords, I desire to say a word in support of what has just fallen from the noble Earl, Lord Crawford, and your Lordships will understand that in what I am about to say I make no reference whatever to any particular persons; I speak simply on the ground of principle. No such power as this has ever been given in this House before. I have inquired, and I am told that there are no precedents. If your Lordships consider for a moment, you will realise that the Lord Chancellor, though he is Speaker of this House, is also a member of the Government, and in that position he stands on a quite different footing from that of the Speaker in the House of Commons. But if there had been a similar Motion in the other House, I very much doubt whether the Speaker would be the person who would be given power to call the House together. I venture to think it is placing a very great power in the hands of a single man. If this power is to be given, it seems to me that it ought to be vested in the Leader of the House. The Leader of the House is the member of the Government responsible to this House, and if he were to exercise the power in an improper way we should have recourse against him. The whole position is entirely anomalous and without precedent, but it seems to me that if this power is to be given it ought to be placed, as I have said, in the 485 hands of the Leader of the House. For this reason, I shall move as an Amendment to substitute the name of the Leader of the House for that of the Lord Chancellor. The inconvenience of adding two or three noble Lords to the Lord Chancellor for this purpose is this. In the first place, how would they meet? It would take them some days to meet. Moreover, if the Lord Chancellor had to consult the Leader of tire Opposition and the Chairman of Committees, the time might have gone; and if there arises an occasion on which the House ought to meet in a great hurry, it certainly appears to me that the Peer who is for the time being Leader of the House is the person who ought to exercise this power.
§ VISCOUNT ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, I venture to express the hope that the noble Marquess opposite will answer the question put by my noble friend Lord Crawford. I can quite conceive, in the present state of affairs, some crisis arising which might require the almost immediate summoning of Parliament during the proposed recess, but I cannot conceive any such crisis arising which would not apply more forcibly to the House of Commons—take, for instance, some financial matter—than to your Lordships' House. I do not know what kind of business the noble Marquess contemplates that we should take if we were summoned at this brief notice, and I hope, if he persists in his Motion, that he will associate with himself my noble friend the Leader of the Opposition instead of the Lord Chancellor.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEMy Lords, I leave it to His Majesty's Government to answer the question which has been put by my noble friend behind me and by Lord St. Aldwyn. With regard to the Motion so far as it affects your Lordships' House, I have already ventured to say that in my opinion some Sessional Order of this kind is necessary. We had, in fact, proof that that was so the other day, when but for the accident that the House was sitting in its Judicial capacity it would have been technically impossible to summon us at a time when our presence was desired. With regard to the authority to whom should be entrusted the power of calling the House together, I am bound to say that there is a great deal to be said 486 for associating with the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack some other authority in this House. It was suggested by my noble friend Lord Crawford that the proper official to associate with the Lord Chancellor was the Chairman of Committees. As between that proposal and the proposal of the noble Marquess opposite, I confess that I rather lean to the noble Marquess's proposal; and for this reason, that I think the Leader of the House and to some extent the Leader of the Opposition are more likely to be aware of what I would call the political exigencies of the situation than the Chairman of Committees. What, I take it, would happen would be that the two Leaders would be communicated with, and that if it was thought desirable to call the House together they would inform the Party Whips, and thus the assembly of the House would be brought about. I note, of course, that this is an emergency proposal applicable only to the present session of Parliament.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWEMy Lords, in regard to the question which Lord Crawford asked—as to how it was that we were taking this action and the House of Commons were not—it is, of course, not our business here to criticise the action of the other House of Parliament, and I think the answer to the noble Earl's query lies in the fact to which the noble Marquess opposite alluded—namely, that we received a severe fright over this question when the House of Commons did not. It was extremely important, in order to pass the Postponement of Payments Bill into law, that we should be called together almost at a moment's notice on a day when we were not sitting for public business. The House of Commons was sitting, and therefore they did not receive the mental shock which we received when we found that it was owing merely, as it seemed, to the happy accident of the House being sitting in its Judicial capacity that we were able to meet that afternoon. I think that, somehow or other, we should have managed to meet that afternoon, but as to exactly how it would have been brought about I do not know. At any rate, we were able to do so without any serious breach of our order and procedure.
The noble Earl opposite suggested that the actual authority for taking this step 487 should be placed in my humble hands instead of in those of my noble and learned friend on the Woolsack. I hope that the House will, however, agree to what was originally proposed, on the understanding, which I mentioned, that both the noble Marquess opposite and myself would be immediately informed by my noble and learned friend as to what was required. I should hope that the probability of action being necessary is a very remote one. So far as the House of Commons are concerned, they would in quite ordinary circumstances be more likely, as the noble Viscount pointed out, to be hurriedly summoned than ourselves in connection with financial business. But they, I suppose, have more than provided for any possible needs in that direction which could arise during the ensuing fortnight, and therefore I imagine that they are content to take in their hands the Act to which the noble Earl alluded, subsequently amended by an Act of Queen Victoria's reign, which, whenever the House adjourns for more than six days, enables it to be called together by Proclamation, which I fancy takes something of the same time to be brought into effect. Therefore I think the House of Commons would not be in as good a position for this purpose as we should be ourselves. I hope that so far as the main purpose of this Motion is concerned the House will be content to leave it as it is, with the strict assurance of the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack that the step, which obviously cannot arise except on a question of urgent political exigency, will only be carried out by him in consultation, not only with me, but with the noble Marquess opposite.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNMy Lords, in a matter of this sort I think understandings are to be deprecated. It is much better to have the thing clearly stated. So far as my suggested Amendment is concerned, I am quite willing that the responsibility should be divided between the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT HALDANE)My Lords, this Motion arose out of the emergency we had the other day. The House had adjourned from the Thursday until the Tuesday, but business of very great moment suddenly became 488 urgent on the Monday. But for the fortunate circumstance that the House had to meet for Judicial business on the Monday morning we should have been in a very great difficulty. I will not say that it would not have been possible for your Lordships to meet on that occasion, but a constitutional question would have arisen which was only saved by the fact that there was a full sitting, though a Judicial sitting, on the Monday morning. There are now no Judicial sittings, and it is owing to the absence of those sittings that the necessity for this emergency Motion has arisen. As a servant of the House I am entirely in your Lordships' hands in this matter, but I wish to say that I should never think of exercising any power which your Lordships might place in the hands of your Speaker except in consultation with the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition. If any such emergency arose, I should communicate at once with both of them before any step was taken. But I again desire to say that this is entirely a matter for your Lordships to determine. As to the form of the Motion, the experienced officials of the House thought that this was the proper form in which it should be moved.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNI beg to move that the words "Lord Chancellor" be deleted, and that the words "Leader of the House and Leader of the Opposition" be substituted.
§
Amendment moved—
Lines 4 and 6, leave out ("Lord Chancellor") and insert in each case ("Leader of the House and Leader of the Opposition").—(The Earl of Camperdown.)
THE MARQUESS OF CREWEPerhaps I might say, on the noble Earl's Amendment, that I really do not know whether either the noble Marquess opposite or I myself have any real existence in our capacity as Leaders.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWEThe positions held by the Leader of the Opposition and by myself are conferred upon us by our supporters. But the Lord Chancellor is a very important entity in his official character.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEI think the noble Marquess and myself may find ourselves, if the Amendment is adopted, in a position of considerable difficulty. If it is left to us two alone, who is to begin? You must have somebody to take the initiative. It seems to me that the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack, by his distinguished position in this House, is admirably qualified to, so to speak, set this official piece of machinery in motion. But if it is left to the noble Marquess and to me, is it the noble Marquess's business to begin or mine?
§ EARL BEAUCHAMPMy Lords, I rise to support what has just fallen from the noble Marquess opposite. There are no such persons known to our Standing Orders as the Leader of the House and the header of the Opposition. Whereas, on the other hand, not only is the Lord Chancellor the Speaker of the House, but he has all the officials directly under him. Therefore it would be obviously more convenient from every point of view that he should be the person to summon the House in case of emergency.
§ LORD PARMOORMy Lords, I venture to think it would be a great disadvantage not to retain the Lord Chancellor's name in this Motion. Might not the matter be dealt with in this way, that the power should be given to the Lord Chancellor but that words should be inserted in the Motion providing that before issuing his writ for summoning the House he should consult the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition. If those terms are not officially recognised we could put in the names—the Right Hon. the Marquess of Crewe on the one side, and the Right Hon. the Marquess of Lansdowne on the other. I think that would meet Lord Camperdown's point. I should certainly oppose the omission of the Lord Chancellor's name from a Motion of this kind.
§ LORD SOUTHWARKI am a young member of your Lordships' House, but an old Parliamentarian, and I rise to suggest that the Motion should remain as it is, leaving with the Lord Chancellor the whole of the responsibility for assembling the House should occasion arise; otherwise there might be a difficulty. If something occurred of vital moment which required that the House 490 should meet, the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack would have to find the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition. It is quite possible that, for some reason or another, the two noble Marquesses could not be found. What an extraordinary position Parliament would then be in. I appeal to noble Lords opposite that they should leave the Motion as it stands.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNI am quite content to accept the modification of my Amendment suggested by Lord Parmoor.
§ LORD PARMOORIf the Amendment is to be in my terms the wording would run, "and it appears to the satisfaction of the Lord Chancellor, with the concurrence of the Marquess of Crewe and the Marquess of Lansdowne," and so on.
§ LORD SOUTHWARKI see a distinguished Parliamentarian on the Front Bench opposite—the noble Viscount, Lord St. Aldwyn. As there is a difficulty in coming to a conclusion and as I have so much confidence in the judgment of the noble Viscount, I would make a personal appeal to him as to whether he cannot give the House the benefit of his advice on this matter.
§ VISCOUNT ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, I ventured to say to your Lordships just now that I thought the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition were the proper persons. But I think we may as well accept the Motion of the noble Marquess who leads the House, on the understanding that my noble friend Lord Lansdowne will be consulted before anything is done.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ On Question, the original Motion agreed to.