§ 2.39 p.m.
§ LORD COLERAINEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they can say what are the terms of reference of the Committee of Inquiry on the problems of nuclear energy, to which the First Lord of the Admiralty referred in his reply to the debate on July 10, 1963.
§ The noble Lord had also given notice of his intention to ask the following Question:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they can say what is the membership of the Committee of Inquiry to which the First Lord of the Admiralty referred in his reply to the debate on July 10, 1963.]
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (LORD CARRINGTON)My Lords, with your Lordships' leave I should like to answer the first Question and the next Question by my noble friend together. My right honourable friend the Prime Minister said in another place on July 11, in reply to Questions about the terms of reference of this Committee:
I think it would be right for me to maintain the position of successive Governments that details of the work of Cabinet Committees are not normally disclosed.In view of the references to this Committee and its work in the report from the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries, I felt justified in informing your Lordships that it would be going into almost all the problems raised in the debate initiated by my noble friend on July 10. I also assured your Lordships that the Government would give the most careful consideration to what had been said in the debate and to what the Select Committee had reported. The exact method adopted by the Government for this purpose should, however, continue to be regarded as part of the confidential machinery of Government.
§ LORD COLERAINEMy Lords, I think that my thanks to my noble friend for his reply must be strictly qualified; 600 nevertheless, I do thank him. If he cannot tell me what the terms of reference include, I wonder whether he could tell me what they exclude? Is the question which was largely and widely developed in the debate—namely, the question of the powers which are used by the Generating Board and the pressures which it is able to bring upon a wide section of industry in the private sector—a point which will be among the deliberations of the Committee?
§ LORD CARRINGTONMy Lords, I think it would be a little difficult to go into what is and what is not in the Committee's terms of reference, because by a process of elimination you would soon find out what the terms of reference were. But during the debate I did make it clear to my noble friend that the Committee would not be investigating the questions of tendering, pricing and contracting, and this could be the subject of a special representation from the company to which the noble Lord referred during the debate. I hope that is the point he has in mind.
§ LORD COLERAINENot entirely, my Lords. That is certainly one of the points, but the real point on which I should like enlightenment is this. Is it really within the functions of a nationalised Board, of which the only statutory responsibility is to produce cheap electricity, to embark on quite considerable schemes for the rationalisation of private industry? Will that point be looked into?
§ LORD CARRINGTONMy Lords, the terms of reference of the Committee were more confined to the problems of nuclear energy and the proportion of nuclear power stations as opposed to conventional ones, but the other point would certainly be taken into consideration by my right honourable friend the Minister of Power.
§ LORD COLERAINEMy Lords, I must thank my noble friend very much, but may I ask him this further question on the point of membership of the Committee, in regard to which his answer was, I think, even more non-committal than on the other point? Can he say whether the membership of this Committee will include any persons, apart from representatives of the Generating Board, on the one hand, and of the Atomic Energy Authority, on the other, who have real 601 technical knowledge of these problems? If the membership does not include such persons, would it not be a good plan to have some technical assessors on the Committee who could advise the lay members on the relative merits of the technical argument? What I think is perfectly plain is that the Generating Board and the Atomic Energy Authority respectively will each be fighting its own corner, and I think it is important that there should be some scientific advice available apart from them.
§ LORD CARRINGTONMy Lords, I take my noble friend's point. I do not think that I ought to go into the composition of the Committee. It is a high-powered Committee. But I take his point and I will pass it on to my right honourable friend the Minister of Power.
LORD REAMy Lords, are we to understand from the First Lord that he cannot answer the second Question on the grounds of security?
§ LORD CARRINGTONMy Lords, it is not security; it is propriety.