HL Deb 08 December 1965 vol 271 cc294-5

2.52 p.m.

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, I have to announce that owing to a mistake in the Not-Contents Lobby last night, the numbers of the voting were incorrectly announced. The correct figure for Not-Contents should have been 71 instead of 69, as was announced. I am arranging for the necessary correction to be made in the Minutes of Proceedings.

LORD CARRINGTON

My Lords, I wonder whether I may ask the noble Earl the Leader of the House a question concerning something he said last night, as a result of the very unfortunate speech of the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell. What the noble Earl said was this: … this House must have been surprised, to say the least, that a number of noble Lords spoke to-day who are known to have economic interests which they did not declare"℄ I leave out a sentence which is not relevant℄ In a previous debate, at least two noble Lords, I agree, declared interests; but they did not declare them to-day. I am afraid that this is what happens if noble Lords do not declare their interests."℄[OFFICIAL REPORT, Vol. 271 (No. 15), col. 244, 7/12/65.] That seems to imply that every noble Lord should declare his interest on every occasion the particular subject is discussed. The reason why we have this rule, as I understand it, is that noble Lords should be aware that some noble Lord does have an interest℄not, if I may say so, that there is anything dishonourable in having an interest, but it is thought that noble Lords should be aware of an interest. I wonder whether, if we accept what the noble Earl has said, we are not going very much too far in suggesting that we should do this on every single occasion the matter is debated. I think we are in some difficulty over this matter, and I wonder whether the noble Earl the Leader of the House would agree that we refer this question to the appropriate Committee of the House, which would be the Committee on Procedure.

THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE EARL OF LONGFORD)

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, for giving me a little notice of the fact that he proposed to raise this point. I naturally cannot join in any criticism of any speech made by any noble Lord yesterday.

SEVERAL NOBLE LORD

Why not?

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

I do not think I should do that. At the moment, I am replying to the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition. I certainly would not claim that anything I said on the spur of the moment represented some pronouncement of any finality. I entirely agree that this is a difficult point which should be explored. It would be a great relief to me, and I am sure to any noble Lord who for the time being led the House, if the matter could be cleared up, and I entirely endorse and approve the suggestion which has come from the noble Lord, Lord Carrington.