HL Deb 05 September 1940 vol 117 cc397-8

5.59 p.m.

LORD STRABOLGI

My Lords, my noble friend Lord Addison has had to leave the Chamber, and has requested me to ask the date on which we reassemble and what business will be taken. I have also to ask the Leader of the House a question which my noble friend had intended to ask when he made his remarks after the statement by my noble friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and that is whether the leasing of these territories or bases to the United States of America will require legislation in your Lordships' House, and, if so, when it is proposed to present the Bills.

VISCOUNT CALDECOTE

My Lords, with reference to the last question which the noble Lord has asked, it is a question that naturally has not been overlooked. It is a question of considerable interest, not only to Parliament, but to constitutional lawyers. Attention has been given to it in the Departments, and, so far as I am able to express a final opinion at present, I think I am right in saying that it is not expected that United Kingdom legislation will be necessary. With reference to the date upon which your Lordships will again meet, the date will be September 17, and it is expected your Lordships will sit on that day and the two succeeding days. I am told that my noble friend Lord Davies has a Motion on the Paper, and there are also two Questions, but otherwise no business is fixed for those days.

LORD STRABOLGI

May it not be that the Government may find it desirable to make another statement on the progress of the war?

VISCOUNT CALDECOTE

I think it is quite likely another statement will be made on behalf of His Majesty's Government. That I assume may be taken almost without being expressed.

LORD STRABOLGI

But we meet definitely on the three days?

LORD NEWTON

My Lords, on the question of the adjournment, may I suggest to the noble Viscount that it would be much more convenient if we met at an earlier hour? What with the approaching black-out and raid alarms and so forth, it at all events would give us a better margin. It seems to me ridiculous to fix the meeting of this House for four o'clock when there is business on the Paper which will occupy several hours. I think I am right in saying that it would be for the general convenience of the majority of this House if we met habitually, say, at three o'clock or at the latest half past three.

LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH

There is another point of view to be considered, and that is that many of us have a great many things to do and we find it difficult enough to get here even at four o'clock.

VISCOUNT CALDECOTE

My Lords, I should be glad to meet my noble friend Lord Newton if it was possible, but there is the judicial business of your Lordships' House to be taken, and that makes it practically impossible for us to meet until four o'clock. I think that indeed is a quarter of an hour earlier than it was customary to meet up to the time of the outbreak of war.