BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. (Hansard, 15 July 1926)

§ THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY)
My Lords, I do not propose to trouble your Lordships 1146 by repeating the observations which I made yesterday evening, but, as I promised I would do, I put upon the Paper a Motion to suspend the Standing Orders and to promote the Boards of Guardians (Default) Bill to the first place upon the Order Paper, which, as your Lordships are aware from what passed yesterday, cannot be done by the ipse dixit of the Government, but can only be done by a Resolution of the House. It is understood that, if your Lordships see fit to accept this Motion, we should expect, upon the Motion that the House should resolve itself into Committee on the Bill, a discussion to take place which I may broadly call a Second Reading discussion, if any noble Lord wishes it. That is not an innovation in our practice. I have in my many years' experience in the House very often helped to use, or rather shared in using, that stage as a substitute for, or a supplement to, the Second Reading discussion. One of the great advantages of your Lordships' House is that there are so many opportunities which, in our elastic procedure, can be used for these purposes. Therefore, that will be quite understood and I am sure that no noble Lord sitting in any quarter of your Lordships' House will contest the practice. I beg to move.

§ EARL BEAUCHAMP
My Lords, I think it is very desirable that at this stage some protest should be made against the action of His Majesty's Government in connection with this matter. Since the noble Marquess made his statement last night I gather from the Order Paper that a Royal Commission is to be held this evening in order to give the Royal Assent to this particular measure. The action of His Majesty's Government is a greater disappointment because for the last two years or so, during which the noble Marquess the Leader of the House has been in charge of our proceedings, there has not generally been such a flagrant 1147 example of denying your Lordships' House the opportunity of taking part in the legislation of Parliament as is afforded this afternoon. It is more particularly to be regretted because the experience of noble Lords in this matter enables them to take part particularly well in the discussion of a measure of this kind. They have great experience of local government and they are able to provide your Lordships with arguments in favour of, or against, a particular course.
There is less excuse, as I cannot help feeling that His Majesty's Government might have been able to foresee the date upon which they proposed to bring this measure before your Lordships' House. The Royal Commission and the Royal Assent seem to be necessary to-day. That should not have been discovered last night, nor earlier in the week; it should have been discovered a fortnight or at any rate a week ago; and this Bill should have been presented to your Lordships in proper time for its consideration. It looks to me like a relapse into the bad old days when your Lordships were not given a proper opportunity of considering these measures. It is a return to the system of single-chamber government which I always understood was one of the particular systems most disliked by noble Lords opposite. In this case it really is a denial of any opportunity to this House of making Amendments in the Bill. If an Amendment were made by your Lordships the Bill would then have to be returned to another place. The Amendment made would have to be agreed to and the Bill would have to be returned to this House before the hour of seven o'clock when the Royal Commission is to meet to give the Royal Assent to the measure.
I regret it particularly in this case because I sympathise with the object of the Bill. I recognise the difficulty in which His Majesty's Government were placed. I sympathise with the principle of the Bill, but I think that further safeguards are obviously necessary. Safeguards are introduced in regard to one particular, but not in regard to another particular in the Bill and there is an obvious Amendment which ought to be introduced in your Lordships' House. However, it is no use suggest- 1148 ing anything of this kind and, speaking for myself and I think for my noble friends, we shall refuse to take any further part in the proceedings on this measure.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
My Lords, I cannot pass over the observations of the noble Earl without some reply. I do not complain of his remarks in any way. I have very often shared the point of view which he has expressed. I think it is fair to say that if the Government have made any error in respect of this Bill it has not been made in your Lordships' House. It is from excess of patience. They hoped against hope that perhaps this particular local authority would have seen its duty so clearly as to conform to what is the law. They extended to the local authority every kind of patience that your Lordships would, I believe, encourage. In administration it is not good to be too brisk. It is better, when there are difficulties, to overcome them by tact, patience and negotiation rather than to crush them, and that is the effort the Government have made. But they put the matter off a little too long and when the particular local authority turned out to be un-repentent there was only one thing to be done—to use the weapon, the heavy weapon, of legislation.
Having put it off so long, no doubt the effect was that the Bill only reached your Lordships very late in the day. I very much regret it and I agree with the noble Earl that it does amount to a denial to this House of a proper opportunity of criticising the Bill. I was a little bit encouraged by a remark he let fall that in the main he agreed with it and I almost hope that may be the general opinion in your Lordships' House. It is possible there may be one or two critics, but I almost believe that even in their hearts they must realise that something of this kind is absolutely necessary if administration in this local authority is not to come to an end. I hope, therefore, that the noble Earl and his friends will realise that we do not intend as a general rule to make a practice of denying your Lordships the opportunity of thoroughly discussing these measures and for this occasion, in view of the great emergency, I hope he will extend to us his forgiveness.

§ VISCOUNT HALDANE
My Lords, I waited to hear what the noble Marquess, the Lord Privy Seal, would say say about this and I listened to him with great attention. I agree that this is an urgent Bill. I agree that the situation which confronts the Government is a difficult one. Of course, it ought to have been dealt with long ago by a reform of the Poor Law, under which this question would not have arisen. But that has not been done and I think that is really the best excuse the Government have for dealing with these matters in the way of isolated cases. Unfortunately, their Bill is perfectly general in terms and applies to every board of guardians throughout England. But I pass that by, to make the observation that there is one thing the noble Marquess did not tell us: that is why the Bill should have been placed on the Paper in such circumstances and at such a time that it should have been impossible for this House to discuss it even very briefly. After all, this is July 15 and we have at least a fortnight. One would have thought that this Bill might have been taken in the ordinary course. I know that the matter is urgent, but there were days on which it could have been taken. Now, we have to settle what, after all, is a question of very great importance at the shortest notice and in the shortest compass. Well, I am not going to push that to extremes. At the same time I ask the noble Marquess to realise that it is no use telling us that this is only a particular occasion which there is no intention of repeating. The question is, whether the particular occasion is one in which his action is justified.