EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL (Hansard, 29 November 1956)

LORD HAWKE
My Lords, this Bill is in the usual form. It is the same as for last year, except that we have dropped the provision for maintaining the 30 m.p.h. speed limit, as that was embodied in legislation last summer. Last year the noble Lord, Lord Silkin, asked that we should produce along with this Bill some form of Explanatory Memorandum. This year we have done so, I hope to his satisfaction. On the Second Reading, the only principle that is really at stake is whether or not there should be an Expiring Laws Continuance Bill. I think your Lordships on all sides would agree that there is common ground on that question. On the other hand, if any of your Lordships wishes to delete any item on the Committee stage, I shall be grateful for notice, so that the appropriate Minister from the proper Department may be here to defend that item. I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

§ LORD SILKIN
My Lords, I am grateful for the statement of the noble Lord, Lord Hawke, that the Government have seen the wisdom of including with the Bill an Explanatory Memorandum. There are now a limited number of Statutes which run on from year to year. I think we all agree that this number should be reduced so far as possible. It is quite unsatisfactory that laws which have been in existence for many years, going back to 1919, should still be continued on this hand-to-mouth basis. I would ask the noble Lord whether, having conceded an Explanatory Memorandum, he would now look at the limited number of Bills that are continued in this way, to see whether that number cannot be reduced and whether some of them cannot be incorporated in permanent legislation. I promise the noble Lord that, if he is on that Bench and my noble friends and I are on these Benches next year, we will look carefully at these measures and accept his invitation to move the deletion of those which we think it inappropriate to deal with in this 711 way. But, having given the noble Lord one year's respite, I have no objection to the Second Reading of this Bill.

LORD HAWKE
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his reception of the Bill. I can assure him that I personally looked at each of these Bills to anticipate the very argument that he brought up. They are Bills which one would hope would not become permanent. For instance, as regards the Aliens Restriction (Amendment) Act. 1919, we still 712 have a pious hope in the back of our minds that one day it may not be necessary to restrict aliens. Many of the others have a much more temporary purpose. Nevertheless, the Ministers' attention will certainly be called to the noble Lord's remarks.