HL Deb 17 November 1959 vol 219 cc608-17

3.10 p.m.

EARL BATHURST rose to move, That the Draft Service Departments Supply (No. 2) Order, 1959, be approved. The noble Earl said: My Lords, in view of the interest which this Order caused in another place, and of the interest which I know many of your Lordships have in this subject, I feel sure that your Lordships would wish me to expand on this Order a little more than my noble friend has done on the two preceding Orders.

My right honourable friend the Prime Minister has announced that the Ministry of Aviation has been set up, in place of the Ministry of Supply, in order to bring together under one Minister the Government's responsibilities for civil aviation and the supply of aircraft, both civil and military. The duties of the new Minister of Aviation will embrace everything with regard to aeroplanes and aviation. He will have special regard to the aviation industry, which has achieved such a magnificent record, and which, due to the incredible scientific advances and the technical requirements of to-day, is faced with unprecedented problems. Along with aircraft, of course, go the development, the production and supply of guided weapons, radar, electronics and atomic weapons.

I think it would be best if I make a brief summary of my right honourable friend's speech in another place to describe the three Orders that are necessary in order that the Order which I am asking your Lordships to approve should be explained. The bulk of the other procurement functions of the former Ministry of Supply will be transferred to the War Office, which will thus be responsible for the supply of equipment needed for the Army. Arrangements may be made for the Admiralty and the Air Ministry to supply themselves with certain stores and equipment previously procured through the Ministry of Supply, for which the present and the new Minister of Aviation is no longer responsible. Responsibility for such stores and equipment used by more than one Service will usually rest with the War Office, which in many cases is the major user of such equipment.

In order to effect these changes three Orders are necessary, of which the third one on the Paper, the No. 2 Order, is the one of which I am now asking your Lordships' approval. The Ministry of Aviation Order, 1959, transfers to the Minister of Supply the functions in respect of civil aviation of the former Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation, and it alters the title of the Minister of Supply to that of Minister of Aviation. That is the first Order. The second Order is the Service Departments Supply (No. 1) Order, 1959, and that restores to the War Office the supply powers which were transferred from the War Office to the Ministry of Supply in 1939. Similarly, it restores to the Air Ministry powers, with the exception of those relating to aircraft, which were transferred from the Air Ministry to the Ministry of Aircraft Production in 1940, and subsequently, in 1946, were transferred to the Ministry of Supply. No similar action is necessary with regard to the Admiralty, which has never lost its supply powers.

The Order which I am asking your Lordships to approve is the Draft Service Departments Supply (No. 2) Order, 1959. This preserves to the Ministry of Aviation the powers of a Supply Department, which it would otherwise have lost through the transfer of those powers to the War Office and the Air Ministry under the Service Departments Supply Order (No. 1), which I have already described. This Order gives to the Ministry of Aviation the latitude necessary to enable it to supply the Army and the Air Force with weapons and equipment, such as guided missiles, radar and electronic equipment and atomic weapons. These changes, of course, will be made with the maximum economy wherever possible.

Before I resume my seat, I am quite certain that your Lordships would wish me to pay tribute to the teams of scientific and industrial workers in the Ministry of Supply, which is now being laid to rest. I want to make it clear that all those who have been engaged with regard to aviation will carry on under the new Ministry in exactly the same way, and I am sure your Lordships will wish them and the aircraft industry, together with their new colleagues who are joining them from the Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation, all success in the exciting new ventures. To the Service Ministries we are handing over extra technicians, Service members, Civil Service men and women and industrial workers of great skill, and I know that they will give to those Ministries the same loyal and unstinted service to the development of supplies as, indeed, they have done to the Ministry of Supply. I commend this Order for the approval of your Lordships. I beg to move.

Moved, That the Draft Service Departments Supply (No. 2) Order, 1959, be approved.—(Earl Bathurst.)

3.16 p.m.

LORD WILMOT OF SELMESTON

My Lords, we are all indebted to the noble Earl for his clear statement about what is a complex piece of procedure and an important and far-reaching proposal in the changes of function of these Ministers. But the procedure is not only complex: I am bound to say that it seems to me somewhat odd, because the first Order, referred to as No. 1, as I understand it, is subject only to the Negative Resolution procedure. This is the first opportunity that this House has had of considering—and even now not really debating—what is a most important change. If this Order is passed to-day, these changes automatically come about. But it seems that the first Order, which sets the train of happenings in motion, which is subject only to the Negative Resolution procedure—to possible annulment by Prayer—cannot yet be assumed to have been passed, because the House is allowed 40 days in which to table a Prayer, in the form of a Negative Resolution, and the major part of those 40 days has not yet expired. So 20 days are still left to any Member of this House to seek a debate, and perhaps a negative decision on Order No. 1.

I understand that some of my noble friends feel disturbed about this matter; they are certain to want a lot more information, as indeed we all do, and are hound to consider putting down such a Prayer. In these circumstances, it would seem useless to proceed with the second step until we are clear about the first step.

Surely it is right that a change of this magnitude should be the subject of a full debate in this House. I happen to have been a Minister of Supply and Aircraft Production and I know what tremendous matters are involved in this proposal. Many thought long ago that the Ministry of Supply was vital. When war threatened, the Government of the day, somewhat reluctantly, but in response to pressure put upon them by honourable Members from both sides in the other place, and by noble Lords in this House, set up a Ministry of Supply; and through the war years and the years that followed a remarkable esprit de corps of scientists, Service Departments and industry was built up under a co-ordinating Ministry. This seems to me, at first sight, to be a most retrograde step and to go back somewhat to the chaotic days when all the Service Departments did their own procurement; and the value of centralisation of research and development will be lost, as it seems to me, at great cost, both in money and in resources.

There may be a great deal to be said for this change, but there are strong arguments both ways, and I think that we [...]ught to hear them. I feel that we should debate this matter fully and should not approve an Order which in any event will be ineffective at this date, while the first Order still has over 20 days to run before it can be made the subject of discussion. I apologise for the length of this intervention and its complexity, but this is a most important matter.

3.20 p.m.

LORD OGMORE

My Lords, I must say that with the first part of the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Wilmot of Selmeston, I have a good deal of sympathy. In order to understand this Order at all, the noble Earl, Lord Bathurst, quite rightly and very kindly, went a good deal wider than the Order. He had to explain two other instruments before 'he could explain this one. I think it puts the House in some difficulty if this sort of procedure is followed. It seems to me that here are two distinct matters, one of which has been touched upon by the noble Lord, Lord Wilmot of Selmeston, and one which has not. The first one is the virtual dissolution of the Ministry of Supply, and the second is the renewal or rebirth of the Ministry of Aviation with a new job attached to it. Those are two matters of first-rate importance, and I should have thought that they justified a full-dress debate in this House when we could consider them at some length.

One of the objects of the Order is to permit the Ministry of Aviation to exercise authority over the production, testing and other matters connected with guided missiles, space rockets, electronics and the like. It occurs to me to wonder whether this is an appropriate task to give to one who is the Minister of Aviation. In the debate on this Order in another place, the Minister himself referred to the necessity at this stage of going into the whole question of the supply, the production and the use of aircraft; and he said, quite rightly, that the whole of the aircraft industry, suppliers and users, at this particular time were in great difficulties, and that there were great problems to be solved.

I ask the question—it is for the Government to answer it, but it seems to me one to which we ought to know the answer—is it right at this time, when the aircraft industry is in these difficulties, to saddle the Minister with another very responsible task which has nothing—or at any rate very little—to do with aviation as we know it to-day? I do not think sending guided missiles to the moon has much to do with B.O.A.C. or B.E.A. The Minister has quite enough to do with his normal responsibilities. When the noble Lord, Lord Pakenham, and following him, I myself, held office as Minister of Civil Aviation, we had no such task as this. When the Conservative Government came into office in 1951, they decided, much against our advice expressed in your Lordships' House, to terminate the separate existence of the Ministry of Civil Aviation and to set up the Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation, which was given a great many other tasks. We warned the Government then—and our warning has proved to be right—that it is quite impossible for any single Minister to have responsibility for all the multifarious tasks which the Government imposed upon the Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation. That view has proved to be correct, and that is the main reason for these Orders and the arrangements they make. In other words, the Government were wrong then, and they may be wrong now.

It seems to me that the situation with regard to these guided missiles, electronics, space research and the rest, is very confused. I do not understand it, and I feel that quite a number of your Lordships may be in the same position. Responsibility for these matters is spread over a number of Ministers, with the Lord Privy Seal eddying round among them somewhere. At the moment he seems to be flying about in outer space in this particular department of Government responsibility. We do not know exactly what the Lord Privy Seal's responsibility is, where his task begins and where the Minister of Aviation's task ends. There are even one or two other Ministers also responsible in this field of space research, rocketry and the like. To ask your Lordships to pass an Order of this kind to-day, with the very meagre information we have been given, and with all the vast problems which I have indicated which have still to be resolved, and upon which we have no information whatsoever, is not treating the House with the courtesy and consideration it deserves.

3.25 p.m.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, it has become a practice in this House that, so far as possible, Divisions should not take place upon Motions to pass Orders such as this. We have debates, and we have Prayers. But the situation in this matter is so difficult—we are being so rushed—that it might be well for your Lordships to consider whether we have any other course to-day but to seek a Division; and for this reason. I beg all your Lordships to keep in mind, first of all, that there are two different Statutes applying to the two different Orders in regard to the practice of your Lordships. My noble friend Lord Wilrnot of Selmeston made a point which I think needs to be impressed upon us. First of all, the No. 1 Order must be coupled with the No. 2 Order, because No. 1 must be passed before we can pass No. 2. But No. 1 is not really operative: it cannot come into opera- tion on November 23 if notice is given of a Prayer against it. That is possibly the best way in which to get to the position which both the Labour and the Liberal Parties in the House seem to desire—a really full debate upon the subject matter of the Order and the operation of the policy.

I suggest to the noble Earl the Leader of the House for his sympathetic consideration that, before we go further, it would be wise for him to withdraw this Order from the Paper to-day, so that we may have on the Paper to-morrow a Prayer against the No. 1 Order. When this is disposed of, then we can proceed without delay upon the Motion to approve the No. 2 Order which we are debating this afternoon. We have no opportunity of doing anything about the second Order, which is subject to the ultimate operative nature of the first, except to debate and vote for or against it now, because in that case the Statute provides that there must be an Affirmative Resolution of both Houses. That is the position.

In my view, we cannot really want, in our heart of hearts, repeated Divisions in your Lordships' Chamber upon Affirmative Resolutions under the Statute, because it would lead to all sorts of difficulty and trouble. But certainly we could have had a first-class debate upon this matter, if we could have had the whole thing under review at one and the same time, by taking a debate on the Prayer first of all on the No. 1 Order. If the noble Earl the Leader of the House will consider what I have said, and if he will withdraw temporarily this Order from the Business of the House to-day, and have an early day for discussing a Prayer against the No. 1 Order, then we can have a full debate so that all the varied opinions in every section of your Lordships' House can be put and can receive their proper answer.

3.29 p.m.

THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS (THE EARL OF HOME)

My Lords, I am not absolutely certain that I understand the position of this complicated procedure, but I think it is this. Orders subject to a Prayer, to the Negative Resolution procedure, come into force as soon as they are made. Parliament has approved of this procedure for an Order of this character, so I should have thought it might be assumed to approve of this method of dealing with Orders. But in this case if we pass these Orders to-day, I think there are some 24 more days to run during which a Prayer against the Order can be moved. Therefore the way is open to the Opposition, if they wish for a full debate, to arrange for a Prayer of a suitable character to be put down; and in that case we should, of course, give facilities for that. I do not think the noble Viscount or the Opposition are in any way prejudicing their chances of a full debate if we allow the Order to go through to-day, and they have a Prayer at a future date which can be arranged.

LORD WILMOT OF SELMESTON

My Lords, I am indebted to the noble Earl the Leader of the House for his help, but I am not sure that it goes far enough. As I understand it, if the No. 2 Order is approved to-day the operative steps will be taken forthwith, and therefore the debate which is promised on the No. 1 Order becomes of rather academic value. The Ministries will have been abolished and the staffs disbanded, and all the physical steps will have been taken, as though Parliament had approved the whole thing, when in fact Parliament has not; indeed, the Opposition have given notice of their intention to table a Prayer which is in effect a Motion not to do this thing. Therefore, although I am crateful to the noble Earl for trying to find a way out of the dilemma into which the Government have got themselves, it does not quite do it. I was permitted to be present at some brief discussion of "the usual channels" the other day, and at that time we were not aware of the proposal to put down a Prayer against the No. 1 Order. That accounts for the somewhat different procedure being followed.

LORD SILKIN

My Lords, if I understand the noble Earl the Leader of the House correctly, what he is saying, and I am not challenging it at the moment, is that Order No. 1 becomes effective the moment it is passed; nevertheless you have forty days in which to put down a Prayer against it. In the meantime you can act on the approval of the House on the No. 1 Order and ignore the possibility of a Prayer. That is what the Government propose doing and they propose to make it operative on November 23. If they do, the value of the Prayer is negatived. As my noble friend just said, it becomes merely an academic question. I should like to ask the noble Earl, what is the virtue of November 23? Why must this come in operation on November 23? If he could suspend the operation of the whole thing until we have had our debate, then it may well be that we shall be satisfied as a result of the debate and there will be no further opposition. But if this Order comes into operation on November 23 whatever the House may say, what is the point of the debate, and what is the noble Earl really offering us? We were hoping that a debate might have some influence on the noble Lords opposite and that they might vary their policy. But if that has already been carried into effect, I cannot see the value of the debate. I would ask the noble Earl whether there is really no possibility of putting off this November 23 operative date until some later date, so that we can have a debate on our Prayer.

THE EARL OF HOME

My Lords, I naturally want to do what I can to help the Opposition to debate this matter and, if they can, to carry their point of view, though I should very much doubt whether that would happen. I do not want to breach without further thought a practice which we have established over many years, that these Orders are taken and that there is time thereafter for a negative Prayer; and, if that is carried, then of course the Order may be nullified. I should like, if I may, in order to help the House, to consider this matter between now and Thursday and perhaps bring a proposal before the House on Thursday, if that meets the point of view of the noble Viscount the Leader of the Opposition.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Earl. The noble Earl has spoken to us once or twice about this matter and I should be very glad to have another word with him before Thursday.

THE EARL OF HOME

My Lords, I should not like it to be thought that we could postpone the date, November 23, but we may be able to meet the noble Viscount's wishes in another way.

EARL BATHURST

My Lords, I am most grateful to my noble Leader for helping me out in dealing with this very technical and complicated legislation. It was for that reason that I went fairly wide in moving this Motion. In view of what my noble Leader and the noble Viscount, the Leader of the Opposition, have said, I beg leave to withdraw the Motion.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.