LORDS AMENDMENTS (Hansard, 30 May 1968)

§ LORD SHACKLETON
My Lords, in moving that this House doth not insist on these Amendments, I would briefly draw your Lordships' attention to the fact that these are the Amendments which were carried in a Committee of the Whole House to Clause 2(2) and which deprive the Government of the power, if necessary, and by agreement a firm, to obtain equity shareholdings in private firms. We spent a long time discussing this matter in your Lordships' House and we had an interesting debate. 1347 On that occasion I prophesied that we had perhaps not seen the last of the Bill and that it might return to us. We have given another place every opportunity of considering these Amendments, and I must say, having been in another place during some of the proceedings, that I think they took full advantage of it—but that is an entirely neutral statement.
Your Lordships have heard the Message from the Commons, which hints that the Amendments infringe their privilege. We know that it is perfectly correct to send such Amendments to another place and that on occasion another place does accept them, but on this matter Erskine May advises us that this hint of privilege is generally accepted by the Lords and that such Amendments are not insisted upon. If I may say so, I am grateful to noble Lords whom I have consulted on this matter. There is a certain urgency in passing this Bill into law and the noble Lord, Lord Drumalbyn whom I consulted, and other noble Lords who took part in the debate, seem to be content to accept this. If there are any points noble Lords wish to ask I shall be glad to deal with them. I beg to move.

§ LORD AIREDALE
My Lords, I hope that this will not happen often. Within the last hour I went to the Printed Paper Office to inquire whether the Commons Reason for disagreeing to the Lords Amendments to this Bill was available; and it was not available. Of course, I heard the Reason from the lips of the noble Lord the Leader of the House, from the Despatch Box, and after he had read out the Commons Reason I was courteously handed a copy of the Commons Reason for disagreeing to the Lords Amendments. It would be a sad business, in my view, if it became customary for Commons Reasons for disagreeing to our Amendments to be considered by us before those Reasons were made available to us in the Printed Paper Office. I am sure that it does not matter on this occasion, but Her Majesty's Government should realise that this is not the sort of thing which would he acceptable to us, except very rarely indeed.

§ LORD SHACKLETON
My Lords, it I may reply to the noble Lord, Lord Airedale, this was a matter to which we gave careful consideration. I consulted noble Lords who were interested, and I fully accept that that is not the same as consulting the House. But this sort of thing is apt to happen just before the House rises for a Recess. As a general point, I entirely agree with the noble Lord, Lord Airedale, and particularly where Amendments are of a complicated kind; but we had good reason to believe that that would not be the case here. I have taken note of what the noble Lord said. and on this occasion the House has certainly been tolerant, but I think the Government have not been guilty of discourtesy to the House. None the less, I take the noble Lord's point.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
My Lords, perhaps I should have said that the Commons disagreed to these Amendments for this Reason: Because they would alter the financial arrangements made by the Commons; and the Commons do not offer any further Reason trusting that the above Reason may be deemed sufficient.