§ THE MARQUESS OF LINCOLNSHIREMy Lords, I beg to ask His Majesty's Government whether, in view of the statement of the Leader of the House that Ministers in charge of Departments are anxious to introduce legislation relating to their Departments in the House to which they belong, the President of the Board of Agriculture will introduce the proposed Bill referring to the settlement of soldiers on the land in the House of Lords.
§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (LORD ERNLE)My Lords, I find it very difficult to answer the Question, because my own personal inclination is to introduce the Bill here and to submit it to the keen, but I hope I may think not unfriendly, criticism of your Lordships' House. The Bill is also one which is well suited for discussion here in many ways. It deals with a subject matter which is very familiar to your Lordships, in which you have that practical detailed knowledge that can only come from life-long familiarity with the subject. But there are certain reasons against introducing the Bill in this House owing to the form and structure of the Bill. It imposes heavy charges upon the public funds, and without continual reference to those charges the Bill cannot be properly discussed and explained; and I have regretfully come to the conclusion—the regret, I may say, is shared by the noble Earl the Leader of the House—that the progress of the Bill will not be helped by its being introduced in this House and moulded and shaped into the form which may be acceptable to your Lordships.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LINCOLNSHIREMy Lords, I must express the regret which a very large majority of my countrymen will feel at the answer given to my Question. I understand the noble Lord the President of the Board of Agriculture to say that the Bill must be brought into the Commons because it is a financial Bill. I should be the very last person to interfere with any of the privileges of the House of Commons, but I have always understood that a measure may be introduced into this House unless the financial clauses are so predominant that it would be a financial measure. Your Lordships know very well that many Bills are brought in and underlined and sent to the Commons. It is a 334 matter of such vital importance that this land question should be brought forward at once that I ventured to hope that this objection would not be sustained. If there is a Bill ready—and I have every reason to believe there is—would it not be wise, in the present state of unrest, to bring the Land Bill forward at the earliest possible opportunity?
During the debate this afternoon the question of land has hardly been mentioned. Yet it is at the root of a great deal of the unrest and danger that exist at the present moment. I hope that this will be taken into consideration by the President of the Board of Agriculture, and that he will reconsider his decision. I would ask the noble Lord what earthly chance a Bill of this description has at the present moment in the House of Commons in the congested state of affairs prevailing there. I have been told that there is one great objection to bringing it in here, and that is that this a House of landlords. If we had an ordinary House of Commons there might be something in that, but your Lordships know perfectly well that there is a Conservative majority of something like 350 in the House of Commons. As to any objection against the Bill being brought into this House because it is a Conservative House of landlords I can only say, having listened to the debates on industrial unrest and especially that of this afternoon, that in those debates I have heard more glorious, undiluted, blessed Radicalism talked in this House than you would ever hear in a month at the Reform Club or the Devonshire Club. I think that in these circumstances there can be no real objection to bringing the Bill forward in this House.
Another reason. There is a good deal of suspicion which is not justified, and if the Bill were brought in here at the earliest possible opportunity it would knock on the head at once any idea that the Government were trying to shelve this question, which is of such vital importance, almost a matter of life and death, to those gallant men who have fought across the seas and saved England. These men are coming back at the rate of 1,000 per day, and we have been told in my own county that we must be ready for 500. What are we to say when these men return? This Bill is practically shelved as it may not be brought forward in the House of Commons for some time, and it will be supposed, what of course is not the fact, that the 335 Government are trying for some reason or another to shelve this question. I am much disappointed at the answer.
§ LORD BUCKMASTERMy Lords, I should like to say one word to the noble Earl who has charge of these matters here in support of what has been said by the noble Marquess. Is it impossible to try this House and see whether this Bill cannot possibly be effectively discussed here before it is introduced into another place? It is considered that the constitution of this House is such that a Bill of this kind may not receive a very favourable reception. Is that quite so sure? The Government have considerable support of their own in this House, and is it right to assume, without a trial, that the Bill will not receive proper treatment here? After all, if what happens to it in this House renders it unpleasant to the Government, they can withdraw it; but it does seem to me a little hard, at a time when the other place is overcrowded with legislation and this House is anxious to do what it can to assist in promoting and securing reasonable legislation for many of the new and difficult circumstances in which we stand, that it should be said this Bill cannot be introduced here. It would no doubt be criticised here, but I will undertake to say it would be criticised by men who have a far greater knowledge of the problem than many people in another place—and after all, the measures of the Government have got to be criticised, and ought to be criticised. I cannot help regretting with the noble Marquess that it has not been thought wise to give this House an opportunity of considering legislation which I should have thought it was eminently fitted to consider.