§ LORD SEMPILL had a question on the Paper asking His Majesty's Government whether any agreement has been reached, or is under negotiation, with the United States of America, for the establishment, after the war, of a world bank entrusted with the right to issue and recall the currency and credit of this country. The noble Lord said: My Lords, the first question standing on the Paper to-day in my name came up in your Lordships' House on 1st December and again on 15th December, but on each occasion it was past the hour at which your Lordships usually rise. So, in the circumstances, I thought it best to ask leave to postpone it until this day, particularly, too, as other members of your Lordships' House had indicated their desire to submit some observations. I should like to take this opportunity of thanking the noble and learned Viscount who sits on the Woolsack for the courtesy he has shown in connexion with this question, to which he was, on those two occasions which I have mentioned, prepared to reply on behalf of His Majesty's Government. This morning I was privileged to receive a telephone call from the Lord Chancellor—an honour which I shall not forget. He suggested that as a somewhat similar matter is being touched on by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in another place, he thought it desirable to withdraw this question—which, my Lords, is a very vital one—until another occasion. This I now propose to do.
THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, may I just express my thanks to my noble friend? I am informed that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is making a somewhat elaborate review of this class of question—which is very important and in some aspects very delicate. I do think it would hardly be reasonable to expect me, in this House at the same moment to make a statement of equal importance. My noble friend will have the opportunity of reading the report of what is said in another place. 868 If, after doing so, he thinks it is right to raise the matter here, I shall do my best to reply to him.
LORD STRABOLGIMy Lords, I would like to make a few observations upon this matter. I do not know whether I should do so at this stage or not, but unless I am called to order by your Lordships I propose now to say what I have in mind. I wish it to be perfectly clear that I am doing so without making any kind of reflection of any sort upon the Lord Chancellor for asking Lord Sempill to withdraw his question. But I do wish, as a member of your Lordships' House, to protest against the theory that because a matter is being touched upon in another place we have no right to discuss it here or should not do so. There are ample precedents for the same question being discussed simultaneously in the two Houses. In fact, I think that that procedure has certain disadvantages, and I have taken occasion to say so. But to request a Peer to withdraw a question because it is being debated by the other House is, I think, very dangerous indeed.
I repeat that I am making no sort of charge or reflection against the Lord Chancellor, who, obviously, was only passing on a message which he received. But twice I have come here to support Lord Sempill on this question, which, as he says, has far-reaching implications and is of great importance. Twice the Lord Chancellor has been ready to reply on behalf of His Majesty's Government. Twice the hour has been too late conveniently to debate so wide a matter. I think that my noble friend Lord Sempill has been most generous in the way in which he has received this request to postpone his question. I content myself with protesting, in the most serious way I can, against this treatment of a member of your Lordships' House and, above all, against the precedent which this might be taken to set up. I only hope that my noble friend will persist in this question, and will raise it again at an early date when we can have the whole matter fully debated.
LORD SEMPILLMy Lords, I beg to thank the noble and learned Viscount who sits on the Woolsack for his very kind remarks. In the circumstances I do not put the question now.