HL Deb 08 June 1939 vol 113 cc336-8

4.27 p.m.

LORD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDE

My Lords, I desire to ask the noble Earl, the Leader of the House, a Question of which I have given him private notice—namely, what steps the Government propose to take in consequence of the Division on Lord Sandhurst's Motion yesterday—regarding grants for motor patrols by the police—in which the Government were defeated; and, in view of the fact that a defeat in the House of Lords does not ordinarily lead to the resignation of the Government, may this House be assured that its decision will not be ignored but will be followed by a change of policy on the part of the Government on the issue in question?

EARL STANHOPE

My Lords, I regret I am not able to give the noble Lord opposite the assurance he desires. I would point out to him, in the first place, that the matter discussed yesterday was largely a question of Privilege. On the other hand, I can assure your Lordships that when a decision is arrived at by this House the Government do seriously take it into consideration, and are doing so.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

My Lords, I must, if I may, correct my noble friend. There was no question of a breach of Privilege in the discussion last night. It is a breach of Privilege for your Lordships to try to alter the law in the sense of imposing a burden on the taxpayers or, as some people think, on the ratepayers too; but certainly for the House to discuss a financial measure and come to a decision upon a Motion is not in any degree a breach of Privilege.

EARL STANHOPE

My Lords, I regret I only heard the end of the debate last night, but, as I understood it, the discussion centred largely on the amount of grant to be paid by the Government to the local authorities. That of course was quite obviously imposing an additional charge on the taxpayer. From that point of view, I suggest, it was a matter of Privilege because money cannot be found from nowhere, and therefore if expenditure increases, that must affect the finances of the country.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

There are no limits to what your Lordships may discuss—no limits whatever, on the ground of Privilege. As to actual decisions on clauses of a Bill, for example, the question of Privilege does arise, but not in a matter of discussion in the least.

EARL STANHOPE

I do not for one moment mean to suggest that your Lordships should in any way limit your discussions, but the Question by the noble Lords opposite was as to what action the Government would take.

LORD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDE

May I ask the Leader of the House whether, if this is a question of Privilege, the noble Lord, Lord Sandhurst, was warned that his Motion was out of order?

EARL STANHOPE

The terms of the Motion were not by any means out of order. The point was the action the Government should take on it. That was the question the noble Lord put to me, not whether the Motion was in order or out of order.

VISCOUNT ELIBANK

May I ask my noble friend whether the Government came to the decision not to accept the Motion in this House because it was a breach of Privilege or because they believed the Motion was wrong?

EARL STANHOPE

It was because it was felt this would upset the whole basis of the contributions between the Central Government and the local authorities. As my noble friend the President of the Board of Education pointed out, these are on a definite scale, and what was proposed in debate, at any rate, was that that scale should be altered.