HL Deb 15 May 1963 vol 249 cc1316-21

3.33 p.m.

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, in the course of the debates held in both Houses on March 28 on Motions to take note of the Report of the Joint Select Committee on House of Lords Reform the Government undertook that, if the debates should show that the proposals of the Committee were generally acceptable to Parliament, they would introduce the necessary legislation during the lifetime of this Parliament in time to be effective at the next General Election. The Government also undertook to make a statement of their proposals before the Whitsun Recess.

The Government have given the most careful consideration Ito the opinions expressed in the course of those debates, both here and in another place. In their view the recommendations of the Committee are likely to be generally acceptable to both Houses, and I can therefore state that it is our intention to introduce legislation to give effect to them in time to take effect at the next General Election. A Bill will be introduced shortly, but if it is not practicable to secure its passage this Session the Government will reintroduce it at the beginning of the next Session.

The Government are prepared to accept, and incorporate in the Bill they will bring forward, all the Committee's recommendations, with the following exceptions on points of detail which I believe will command general support.

First, we believe the recommendation that a Peer who has surrendered should be required to exhibit to the returning officer a certificate of his surrender is not workable in practice and should be omitted.

Second, we propose to allow a candidate who succeeds to a Peerage while he is standing for Parliament to proceed with the election and, if successful, to have the same period (a month) in which to decide whether to surrender as if he were a sitting Member.

Third, it is proposed that in calculating the period in which a person who succeeds to a Peerage while a sitting Member of Parliament has to make up his mind whether to surrender that Peerage time should not run while Parliament is not sitting, nor for any period during which the Speaker certifies that the Member is incapacitated from acting through illness or for some other reason.

My Lords, it is that statement that I make in this House and which my right honourable friend has made in parallel in another place.

EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, I am much obliged to the noble and learned Viscount the Leader of the House for making this statement. To deal first with the points of differentiation, I would say that two or three of my noble friends and I have examined them, and while we have not yet heard the view of my main Party I think that we see nothing really objectionable in the three amended proposals which the Government recommend should be put in the legislation referred to.

We welcome, of course, the decision to proceed with legislation. As to the timing of the legislation, I suppose that that is somewhat connected with the Government's present maintenance of an attitude of secrecy as to when they think the General Election is going to take place. However, I should have thought it rather advisable, in such circumstances as those in which we live to-day, if the Government could make up their minds and promise both Houses of Parliament that the legislation would be passed this Session, and then it would be convenient to them and to everybody else concerned whichever sort of period they decided upon.

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, may I deal with one point at a time, because I am rather apt to forget supplementaries if I do not deal with them at once? I am grateful to the noble Earl, Lord Alexander of Hillsborough, for his welcome of this statement, and especially his confirmation of my own feeling, that these amendments are of detail and have no significance of a political kind which need detain your Lordships, at any rate now. As regards the timing of legislation, I must say that I am very concerned about the state of Business in this House this Session. The other place, quite rightly, has the right to start the main series of Government programme Bills. This results year after year, as your Lordships are only too painfully aware, in a tremendous congestion of Government business and of all business towards July, which seems to increase rather than to diminish. I really do not know how I could undertake now and in the present state of affairs that we could get this legislation through both Houses in July. It is not that I have any political feelings about it, but simply that I have found this difficulty, year after year, in the summer part of the sittings of Parliament, and I think this year has been the worst that I can remember.

LORD REA

My Lords, may I also welcome the statement made by the noble and learned Viscount? With regard to his last observations, would it be possible to consider more initiation of major Bills in this House, so that the congestion in July would be spread between the two Houses and we should not be the only victim? I should like to welcome this statement very much. As the noble Earl, the Leader of the Opposition said, one has not had time to discuss it on a Party basis, but I am sure I can give the noble Viscount the assurance that the Liberal Party will support and welcome the course taken, and I am certain that the three exceptions that he has put in his statement will be acceptable to everybody. They seem to be most wise. There is one point which I should like to put into his mind. Before the Bill comes before either House, can the Title of the Bill be reconsidered? This is not a Reform of the House of Lords Bill at all. It is surely a Reform of the House of Commons. The only reform of this House is that possibly we are going to lose one or two Members whom we should rather like to keep with us. It has led to a lot of misunderstanding in the country that we are reforming your Lordships' House, when we are merely altering the rules so that the other place may benefit.

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, I am not sure that every body in the world needs reforming. We are actually, if the Committee's recommendations are acceptable, introducing into this House a number of Peeresses and a number of Scottish Peers, so that in that sense we are reforming the House. I am very much obliged to the noble Lord, Lord Rea, for his suggestion about initiating legislation in this House, which is something I have tried to do every Session. There are difficulties, one of which is that the Commons, quite rightly, demand precedence in matters of political importance, and probably all Parties would agree with that. And sometimes we are in the misfortunate position that the Commons cannot pass legislation which was started here, and then I get into trouble with the noble Earl opposite, which I do my best to support, but it is still very mortifying to the Leader of the House. As regards the Title of the Bill, I will certainly bear in mind what the noble Lord says, but it is very difficult to think of Titles of Bills and I am not sure whether it has not become stuck with this Title.

LORD SILKIN

My Lords, while I am fully conscious of the difficulties which the noble and learned Viscount has explained to us, I would ask him just to bear in mind that if this change is to be of value to those people for whom it is intended they must have the opportunity of taking advantage of it by finding seats, being adopted as Parliamentary candidates, and so on, and if this change comes into operation too close to the Election it will be useless to them. Some noble Lords possibly have seats ready for them, but if the noble and learned Viscount himself is going to take advantage of it—and, of course, one does not know—he may have some difficulty himself in finding a constituency that will adopt him. It may take some time; and the same consideration applies to others. I think, therefore, that this proposal ought to become law well before any General Election takes place. To make it operate just before a General Election will be of no value to a great many noble Peers who might want to take advantage of it.

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, there is something in what the noble Lord, Lord Silkin says. I do not think I would go the whole way with him, because now that this announcement has been made noble Lords who may secretly harbour this intention may start prospecting, for all I know. At any rate, I do not want to stop anybody on either side of the House through whose mind this idea may have passed. We wish to make it effective by the Election—that is in the statement—and I should not agree at all that it would be of no use after that time. It is a continuing reform which will have a permanent value to anyone who may succeed to a peerage, and for a year, at any rate, if the Committee's recommendations are accepted, to those who have not found themselves in this House otherwise than by created peerage.

THE EARL OF SANDWICH

My Lords, would my noble and learned friend make his remarks a little more cogent upon the question of the propriety of a Peer who wishes to seek a seat in the Lower House promoting his candidacy in one constituency or other before the Bill has even passed Parliament or even been seen and looked at in all its consequential provisions? And if he deems it is proper for Peers to make what he calls a "prospective approach", would he suggest that they should make it in their existing names as Peers, in the knowledge that when the Bill is passed they will assume some other name? Or would he reverse the process and suggest that it is more proper for them to make the approach to the electors in the surname of their family, in the knowledge that the Bill may subsequently be amended by this House or another House to enable them to sit in the Lower House in their present name?

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, I should think that these are essentially matters of private conscience and for the constituencies who might be entertaining advances of this kind. The general nature of the proposals is contained in the Committee's Report and I think is fairly plain. I do not think this would be altered much by the draftsmanship of the Bill, but it is probably in everybody's interest that as soon as the Bill is drafted and is acceptable as draftsmanship of what we have contained in this statement, people should be aware of its terms.

BARONESS SUMMERSKILL

My Lords, could I remind the noble and learned Viscount the Leader of the House that we were told by the Government that it was quite right and proper in regard to the London Government Bill to anticipate legislation? Could we not therefore apply the same principle to this Bill, to make it quite clear to everybody that as soon as the Bill has been announced legislation can be anticipated and, therefore, selection committees of constituencies may invite those Peers who are prepared to offer themselves? The point is that in order that this should go forward Peers should now declare their own position as to whether they are eligible or not for selection.

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, I feel quite certain that if any Peer wished to put his name before a selection committee he would have to answer a number of penetrating questions, but whether or not they would be prepared to take the chance of the Government's not securing a majority when it produced the Bill is a matter for them and, I suppose, the Party they belong to. Personally, I feel that these matters of private conscience and judgment are too heavy a burden to place upon my shoulders.

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, I suppose the noble and learned Viscount would not accept responsibility for Peers setting up a sort of "A and B" list of candidates?

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

We could always have a sort of employment agency.