LOCAL AUTHORITIES (EMERGENCY PROVISIONS) BILL. (Hansard, 29 May 1924)

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
My Lords, when we discussed this Bill upon the Second Reading I think the House took the question of privilege more lightly than it should. I have since looked into the question, and I think it is clear that this Amendment is a breach of privilege. I have consulted the authorities upon the subject, and I think the shortest course will be to read out a passage from Sir Thomas Erskine May's well-known book on the "Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament" which puts the matter in a few lines. At page 509 of the 12th Edition your Lordships will find these words— By the practice and usage based upon that resolution, the Lords are excluded, not only from the power of initiating or amending Bills dealing with public expenditure or revenue, but also from initiating public Bills which would create a charge 773 upon the people by the imposition of local and other rates, or which deal with the administration or employment of those charges. Bills which thus infringe the privileges of the Commons, when received from the Lords, are either laid aside or postponed for six months. It follows, accordingly, that the Lords may not amend the provisions in Bills which they receive from the Commons dealing with the above-mentioned subjects, so as to alter, whether by increase or reduction, the amount of a rate or charge, its duration, mode of assessment, levy, collection, appropriation or management; or the persons who pay, receive, manage, or control it; or the limits within which it: is leviable. These words seem to me very clearly to cover this Amendment. This Amendment proposes to deal with the Metropolitan Common Poor Fund, and to say that the provision in the Commons Bill, proposing that out of that fund there should be a payment continued for two years, shall continue to operate only for one year, is, it seems to me, a breach of privilege as plain as language can be, and I suggest to the House that it will not be wise to proceed with this Amendment.

§ EARL BEAUCHAMP
I have no doubt that the law is accurately stated by the noble and learned Viscount, but that does not quite finish the whole of the case. It does not follow that because this Amendment is a breach of privilege, therefore, supposing it be put into the Bill, the House of Commons will stand upon their privilege. It is well within the knowledge of any one of your Lordships who has sat in this House any length of time that on more than one occasion this House has suggested very useful Amendments which have been breaches of privilege, but which, when they went down to another place for consideration, were recognised to be improvements and therefore were accepted. It is quite true that on this occasion this Amendment might not be considered to be an improvement, but that might not prevent the House of Commons as a whole from waiving its privilege in the peculiar conditions in which we live at the present time. In these circumstances I really cannot see that there is any harm in introducing this Amendment into the Bill, leaving it to another place to assert its privileges, if it desires. And I need not add that, should they assert their privileges, I should have nothing more to say on the matter. But, as a useful suggestion 774 which commends itself generally to the opinion of your Lordships, I really cannot see that there is any harm in introducing it to the Bill.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
I think that, as the noble and learned Viscount has taken the line he has done the course which your Lordships should pursue is very evident. I confess that I always view with a great deal of suspicion the plea which is made by the Government of the day, from whatever Party it may be drawn, that an awkward Amendment, from their point of view, should not be put into the Bill on the ground of the privilege of the Commons. It is such a very facile way of escaping a difficulty that one always looks at it with a certain amount of suspicion. And if the words which the noble and learned Viscount has read are strictly interpreted it would come to this, that no legislation which in any way affected, directly or indirectly, taxation or rating would be open to your Lordships' House to amend. But, of course, we have always resisted that interpretation of privilege, and, indeed, it would render the House perfectly useless if it were once admitted, because, practically speaking, all legislation ultimately affects either taxation or rating. Therefore, you have to take every case on its merits. Where there is a direct charge laid upon the subject, whether it be by direct taxation or rating, it is always a breach of privilege, and the House of Commons, when they are dealing with taxation, generally speaking will not admit any waiver. But I think the noble Earl is right in saying that, in cases where the matter only affects rating, over and over again the House of Commons has been willing to waive its privilege. At any rate, I think it is not for your Lordships to admit the privilege in this case, until we see what line the House of Commons takes. And therefore, speaking for my noble friends who sit around me, and by the wish of the Leader of the Opposition, I would suggest to your Lordships that we should put in this Amendment, which is a thoroughly sound Amendment in itself, and leave it to the House of Commons to take what action they think fit.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
It is for the House to decide. I have told your Lordships what seems to me to be the exact point in the matter, and I will 775 only say this further. I agree with the noble Marquess that there are cases where, inevitably, legislation here touches questions of finance which are for the other House. And I agree also that it has often happened that the other House has raised no question of privilege in those cases. But I have never known the other House to sit down in a case where, in a single-clause Bill, the sole purpose was to make a grant of money limited to two years, and to submit to have half of that swept away by a direct Amendment made in this House. However, it is for your Lordships to decide, and we can only see what the other House says about it.