EXPORTATION OF ARMS ACT (1900) AMENDMENT BILL. (Hansard, 25 November 1914)

§ LORD ISLINGTON
My Lords, this is a Bill that has passed through the other House with only amendments that have been moved by the Government in order to make the Bill more explicit. Its main object is to extend the scope of other Acts which now deal with the exportation of naval and military stores and food, Acts which were passed first in 1879, then in 1900, and the most recent of which was passed in a more comprehensive form at the commencement of the war, enabling by Proclamation and Order in Council the prohibition of the exportation of any articles whatsoever. Under the conditions of the present war it is necessary, in regard to certain articles, to take steps to insure that they do not reach the enemy's country, and it is also equally important that articles should not reach neutral countries which might be released to find their way into the enemy's country. But in protecting ourselves against the exportation to foreign countries of war material or any indirect 175 material which will enhance their strength, it is also important that there should be no steps taken to hamper unduly our trade with those countries which are in no way in contact with the enemy. This Bill is to extend the scope of prohibition and at the same time to modify it where necessary. It also enables the Government to deal in their actions in this matter in a more expeditious manner by Order of Council instead of the more dilatory mariner by Proclamation. I beg to move.

§ THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE
My Lords, I have no wish to interfere with the passage of this Bill or in any way to delay its progress, but I would like to ask the noble Lord whether he can tell us a little more fully why a rather unusual procedure is adopted in the Bill, and why the authority is "the Lords of the Council on the recommendation of the Board of Trade." I do not know quite who the Lords of the Council are. We are familiar with Proclamations in Council and Orders in Council by the Sovereign, but I do not know why this change is made from the usual procedure. I believe it was made in one of the Bills we passed rather hurriedly in August, but I should like to know whether there is any reason for this, as I may point out that the powers are very drastic. I do not want to criticise them, of course, but I bring this point forward in order to raise a little demur at the new procedure becoming too much of a precedent and being imported too freely into powers dealing with emergency matters such as this.

§ LORD ISLINGTON
My Lords, the main reason for placing this as an Order of Council as distinguished from an Order in Council is to give the necessary expedition to any action where necessary for a modification of the prohibition. The process of an Order in Council and then Proclamation is somewhat dilatory and is bound to take some days. This is a more rapid process by which the sanction of the President of the Council is obtained and given effect to on the recommendation of the Board of Trade, who are the authority dealing with these questions of prohibition or modification. The powers certainly are very wide, and, as I am sure my noble friend will understand, necessarily so, 176 because you have to deal with these matters at very short notice. This is only for the war, and it is in order to meet those exceptional cases that crop up from day to day that the proposal has been made.