HL Deb 09 April 1963 vol 248 cc918-20

2.47 p.m.

LORD CONESFORD

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether "containerised merchandise" on page 142 of the Report of the British Railways Board means goods in containers.]

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, I am bound to say that the expression "containerised merchandise" conveys to me the idea of goods carried in containers. I have, however, taken the precaution of asking the British Railways Board who were responsible for drafting the Report. They confirm that this is so. They also tell me that "merchandise" is a term of art which does not apply to all kinds of goods. "Containerised" appears to be regarded as a form of shorthand.

THE EARL OF SWINTON

Shorthand!

LORD CHESHAM

British Railways inform me that the whole expression "containerised merchandise" is in common use in railway circles, though in my noble and learned friend's circles it may be regarded as jargonised Anglification.

THE EARL OF SWINTON

My Lords, would it be possible for Her Majesty's Ministers to instruct their scriptwriters that all short words are not necessarily obscene?

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, the noble Earl will be aware that the Report referred to is not a Government publication. It is the responsibility of the Railways Board, and I do not think, the Government should set up as the arbiter of the elegance of the English which is used in other people's Reports.

THE EARL OF SWINTON

My Lords, may I ask the present Government whether they could not follow the example of Sir Winston Churchill's Government? Even in the hardest days of the war the Prime Minister found time to instruct both Ministers and civil servants to try to talk and write English.

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, that is a sentiment which I most heartily echo. I think more efforts have been made to do just that since then. But I still maintain that, while the Government should use their influence within their own sphere of operations, it is not desirable, to extend it as a form of literary censorship elsewhere.

LORD CONESFORD

My Lords, why do the British Railways Board use such disgusting language?

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, I have not the faintest idea.

LORD FARINGDON

My Lords, would the noble Lord not agree that, on the whole, English is more comprehensible than jargon, and therefore desirable?

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, I agree completely, and that is why I took the trouble to devise the last two words of my original Answer, because I thought they would appeal to the noble Lord who asked the Question. But I would draw Lord Faringdon's attention to the fact that, apart from a few phrases, there is a good deal of pretty straight and forceful English in that Report.