Lords Sitting of 30 October 1968

THE QUEEN'S SPEECH
The QUEEN, being seated on the Throne, and attended by Her Officers of State (the Lords being in their robes), commanded the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod. through the Lord Great Chamberlain. to let the Commons know, "It is Her Majesty's pleasure they attend Her immediately in this House."
Who being come, with their Speaker:
Her Majesty was pleased to speak as follows:
"My Lords and Members of the House of Commons,
"My Husband and I look forward with pleasure to the State Visit of the President of the Republic of Italy and to our own visit to Brazil and Chile.
"My Government will continue to play an active part in the efforts of the United Nations to ensure peace and to assist the advancement of the developing world.
"My Government will continue to work through the United Nations for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. They will take every oppor-
2
tunity open to them to help the two sides achieve a negotiated settlement of the Vietnam conflict.
"I look forward to welcoming to London in January the Heads of Government of other member countries of the Commonwealth.
"My Government intend to ratify the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. They will continue to work actively for further progress on measures of arms control and disarmament in both the nuclear and non-nuclear fields. To this end they will vigorously pursue the proposals they have put forward to advance the negotiations.
"My Government will maintain their application for membership of the European Communities and will promote other measures of co-operation in Europe in keeping with this.
"My Government will continue to support Britain's alliances for collective defence and will play an active part in the North Atlantic Alliance as an essential factor for European security. The development of My Government's relations with the countries of Eastern Europe which took part in the invasion of Czechoslovakia has necessarily been set back, but it remains their aim to work for genuine East-West understanding.
"My Government will continue to take the necessary steps to withdraw British forces from Malaysia, Singapore and the Persian Gulf by the end of 1971. Furthermore, in consultation

3
with the Governments concerned, My Ministers will maintain their efforts to promote conditions favourable to peace and security in the areas concerned.
"My Government will continue to seek to bring about a return to constitutional rule in Rhodesia in accordance with the multi-racial principles approved by Parliament.
"Members of the House of Commons,
"Estimates for the public services will be laid before you.
"My Lords and Members of the House of Commons,
"My Government will press forward their policies for strengthening the economy so as to achieve a continuing and substantial balance of payments surplus. This will enable us to meet our international obligations, rebuild the reserves, develop industry and safeguard employment.
"My Government will work closely with other Governments to maintain the smooth working of the international monetary system. They look forward to the early entry into force of the Special Drawing Rights Scheme.
"My Government will develop policies to encourage a better distribution of resources in industry and employment and to make fuller use of resources in the Regions.
"Legislation will be brought before you to convert the Post Office from a Department of State to a public corporation.
"Legislation will be introduced to integrate transport in London under local government control; and to establish a central system of vehicle registration and licensing.
"Legislation will be introduced to help the development of tourism in Great Britain.
"A Bill will be introduced to effect the change to a decimal currency.
"My Government will continue to promote the development of agriculture's important contribution to the national economy.
"Legislation will be introduced for assistance to the deep sea fishing in-
4
dustry and for the policing and conservation of fisheries.
"My Government will lay before you proposals for action on the Report of the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers' Associations. They will also bring forward proposals for amending the Merchant Shipping Acts in accordance with the recommendations of the Court of Inquiry on the Shipping Industry.
"My Ministers will submit for consideration a proposal to enable the United Kingdom to give effect to the United Nations Convention on Genocide.
"Legislation will be introduced on the composition and powers of the House of Lords.
"My Government will begin consultations on the appointment of a Commission on the constitution. The Commission would consider what changes may be needed in the central institutions of Government in relation to the several countries, nations and regions of the United Kingdom. It would also examine relationships with the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.
"A Bill will be brought before you to reduce to eighteen the age for voting and to make other reforms in electoral law.
"Legislation will be laid before you to reduce the age of majority to eighteen.
"A Bill will be introduced to reform the law for England and Wales relating to children and young persons.
"Our social security schemes will be kept under close review. My Government will publish for public discussion proposals for a new scheme of national insurance founded on earnings-related benefits and contributions.
"Legislation will be brought before you to increase the pensions of retired members of the public services and their dependants.
"My Government will give special attention to the form of administration of the health and welfare services.
"Measures will be introduced to modernise the town and country planning system in Scotland; and to bring

5
the law relating to education in Scotland into line with current developments.
"Legislation will be introduced to give rights of appeal against decisions taken in the administration of immigration control.
"A measure will be laid before you to provide for a specific grant towards a programme of additional local authority expenditure in urban areas of special social need. This will include additional provision for children below school age.
"Proposals will be brought forward for implementing the recommendations of the Tribunal appointed to inquire into the tragic disaster at Aberfan.
"Legislation will be introduced to give greater encouragement to the repair and improvement of older houses and their environment.
"My Ministers will submit for consideration a proposal to raise the existing legislative limit on Government expenditure on the construction of the National Theatre.
"Legislation will be introduced to make reforms in the administration of justice. My Government will carry forward their comprehensive programme for the reform of the law. In particular, Bills will be laid before you to extend in England and Wales the rights of succession to property by persons who are illegitimate and to amend the law of heritable securities in Scotland.
"Other measures will be laid before you.
"My Lords and Members of the House of Commons,
"I pray that the blessing of Almighty God may rest upon your counsels."
House adjourned during pleasure.
House resumed at half-past three of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR OR the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Portsmouth.
The Viscount Cobham—Took the Oath.
The Lord Tryon—Took the Oath.

SELECT VESTRIES
Bill, pro forma, read la.

ADDRESS IN REPLY TO HER MAJESTY'S MOST GRACIOUS SPEECH
The Queen's Speech reported by The LORD CHANCELLOR.
3.46 p.m.
LORD DELACOURT-SMITH: My Lords, I beg to move, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty as follows:
"Most Gracious Sovereign—We, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to thank Your Majesty for the most gracious Speech which Your Majesty has addressed to both Houses of Parliament."
My Lords, I am sure the whole House will wish me to express on its behalf the congratulations which we would extend to Her Majesty on the visit to Malta in the last Parliamentary Session, and to offer our heartfelt good wishes for the success of the journey which Her Majesty, accompanied by Prince Philip, will be undertaking to Brazil and to Chile. I am sure, too, my Lords, that we should all wish to express our gratification at the forthcoming meeting of the leading representatives of the Commonwealth.
I am conscious, as a new Member of this House, of the honour that is extended to me in giving me the opportunity to move this Motion to-day; and,

7
like those who have sought to discharge this task before, I shall seek to navigate a course between the Scylla of controversiality and the Charybdis of insipidity.
Fifty years ago, my Lords, this country of ours stood at an astounding peak of power. It had, in one and a half centuries, built up the greatest Empire the world had seen, and that process had marked every aspect of our national life. Our patterns of finance and industry, our educational system, the role and the character of our Armed Forces, the relationships of social classes here at home— all had been profoundly affected by that development. In fifty years—within the lifetime of the great majority of us in this House—there has been such an immense change that it is hardly surprising that we who, in our time, are dealing with the problems of the aftermath of Empire should find our country faced with a vast problem of adaptation, and that there are many, both here and abroad, who find it hard to define the role of Britain, the meaning of Britain, in the latter part of this century. The political developments which are foreshadowed in the gracious Speech may perhaps be reasonably seen against that problem which faces all of us—the problem of defining for ourselves the role of this country and the part which it can play in the world.
Our role, my Lords, must continue to be a world one, but not, as we all now recognise, one based upon the military strength and influence which this country once had. The rulers of the United Kingdom, like the rulers of the Soviet Union and of the United States, are in their day-to-day relationships with the rest of the world faced constantly with weighing, on conflicting courses, alternative risks which cannot be precisely measured. We all earnestly hope that this country may be able to find an honourable settlement with Rhodesia, and may be able to play a constructive part in bringing peace in Vietnam and in the Middle East, but perhaps the present occasion is one on which we can think of the growing framework of international organisations and, above all, of the United Nations and its Special Agencies. It is in these that there is to be found a great hope, perhaps the greatest hope, of building a world which will be free from the
8
tensions and insecurities which lie at the root of conflict.
At such a time we must not forget how the wisest statesmen in past years used to talk of the indivisibility of peace. In the world to-day we need to think of the indivisibility of the efforts to raise health standards, to combat ignorance and to raise economic stability and living standards. In so doing, the world is faced with among other things, the great and growing burden of armaments which not only contribute to tension and insecurity between nations but themselves impose an economic burden which makes it more difficult to narrow the gap—a gap, indeed, which, so far from narrowing, is at present tending to widen—between the richest nations and the poorest nations.
I think we are all at one in saying that our role in the world can be sustained only upon the basis of an economy stronger than we have known in past years. There are some signs of the strengthening of that economy; but, we are not yet even at the end of the beginning in securing an economy for this country strong enough for the 1970s. My Lords, in this connection as many who have spoken before on industrial problems have said, attitudes are as important as measures. A wise man once said that the future belongs to those who are in love with the new. Reflecting on that, we may perhaps not merely reluctantly accept change but positively seek it and be willing to embrace it.
In this connection I am bound to say that I find disturbing what I might call the "S.E.T. problem"—not in this context the selective employment tax but the supply of scientists, engineers and technologists. This problem has been examined by the Committee on Manpower Resources for Science and Technology; and it is disturbing to find, for example from the Swan Report, that the number of sixth form students in these subjects has actually been declining and that in certain circumstances we might find ourselves in the next five years not with more students of these disciplines in our universities but with fewer. This matter and the question of the use which industry makes of graduates in these disciplines are subjects which I believe we shall have to examine when we in this House discuss and consider industry.

9
From a purely personal point of view, for me the most interest of all the proposals contained in the gracious Speech is that which relates to the Post Office, because virtually all my adult life has been spent in the trade union organisation and representation of Post Office employees. But those who are most closely acquainted with that institution have, I think, come increasingly to share the view that it can render increasingly better service in the future under some form of organisation other than a Civil Service Department. But the test of the legislation which is to come before us on this subject will, I submit, be in how much it succeeds in preserving what has been good in the Post Office in the past and in removing the weaknesses which have begun to appear.
There are, too, proposals in respect of the position of the workers engaged in the Post Office. This naturally leads on to the proposals which will arise from the recommendations of the Donovan Commission on Trade Unions and Employers' Associations. To these we shall need to give a searching examination, free from preconception. There are some who take the view that stronger legal controls need to be imposed; but, whatever our judgment may be on that subject, we must never allow preoccupation with the legal framework to blind us to some of the factors which are most fundamental in securing improved industrial relations: bargaining procedures which have got out of date; trade union structures and employers' associations structures which have got out of date; the fear of losing a job and not being able to get as good a one; badly devised systems of payment in many industries; the dirt, discomfort and risk which still attend so much of the work in industry; the boring retpetitice work to which so many people are condemned; the practicaly impossibility for many of progressing in the industry which they have entered. These are among the subjects to which I believe we need to direct our attention, as well as to institutional frameworks and to legal powers, if we want to see improvement in industrial relations.
My Lords, consideration of industrial relations leads us to the human aspects of the proposals in the gracious Speech Here I am bound to say a word of pleasure—I hope I do so on behalf of
10
many noble Lords—at the reference to a further stage in the building of a National Theatre. And perhaps, if I am not straying too far, I may add that our present National Theatre Company, even without its own specially built theatre, has magnificently vindicated the advocates, those who over the long campaign of half a century have argued for the establishment of such an institution.
My Lords, proposals are to come before us which relate to the age of majority and to the age of voting. I shall be surprised if we are divided upon the principle here. These proposals will bring younger men and women into the political community. There has always been, in every generation, a lot of head-shaking and hand-wringing among the middle-aged and elderly about the conduct and standards of the young. My own belief is that that sort of altitude, was never less justified than it is in our present generation. I believe that those who form their opinions of young men and women at first hand and not at second hand will have found, as l have, among the vast majority of them qualities of generosity of spirit, of open-mindedness and frankness, and of sensitivity to human suffering—qualties which are, I believe, of the very greatest value to our community and to its future. Wisdom, judgment and many other things may no doubt come with time, but the virtues that we see in so many of our young people to-day are a very good start.
Then we shall be considering the relationship of the Health Service and social security. We shall have the opportunity, no doubt, to survey the scope and organisation of our welfare services. There is a glossiness to-day about some aspects of our society which enable some, for part of the time at any rate, to forget how serious and widespread the problems of poverty and deprivation still are. I hope that in making this examination we shall have a special opportunity to look at the position of those groups whose difficulties are so complex that they require not just one social service but the whole range: not the health services only, but the welfare services as well. I am thinking of the long-term disabled, the young chronic sick, the problem families, the families who depend upon an unsupported mother whether deserted, unmarried or widowed.

11
These are groups who have problems that are human problems as well as material ones, and we need to ensure that the range of services which we have are fully adequate for those who stand most gravely in need of them.
My Lords, I suggested that we were in our generation faced with the task of dealing with the aftermath of Empire and of trying to face the urgent task of redefining Britain's role in a very changed situation. I believe that we can define that role as one of aiming at a society which truly bases itself upon the dignity and the development of every single individual, and which shows this spirit both at home and abroad. This means, my Lords, a society marked by tolerance and compassion; not disfigured by snobbery or racial prejudice; not taking power or wealth as national objectives in themselves, but concerned with how the power is used and how the wealth is distributed.
A society of that kind is, I believe, the goal of hundreds of millions in the world to-day. I believe it is the goal of a very large proportion of our own young people, in whatever particular political form they may choose to express and discuss their views. But it is a goal which no major country is yet in sight of achieving. A race towards it would he more worth while than a race to put men on the planets. Progress to such a society will not be easy, and it will not be quick, but it is a progress for which this country, by its history and by its tradition, is fitted. To accept it as an aim can, I believe, give unity and articulation to the many diverse measures which we shall be discussing in the next twelve months. My Lords, I beg to move the Motion for an humble Address to Her Majesty.
Moved, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty as follows:
"Most Gracious Sovereign—We, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to thank Your Majesty for the most gracious Speech which Your Majesty has addressed to both Houses of Parliament."—(Lord DelacourtSmith.)
4.5 p.m.
LORD SAINSBURY: My Lords, I beg to second my noble friend's Motion for an humble Address in reply to Her Majesty's most gracious Speech. I feel greatly honoured at having been asked to do so by my noble friend the Leader of the House. It gives me very great pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Delacourt-Smith, a man of such wide experience in many fields and with such a fine record of public service. He has moved the Motion in most thoughtful and felicitous terms. May I immediately associate myself with his good wishes for success on Her Majesty's forthcoming visit to South America. I am sure that all noble Lords would wish to join in the welcome extended in the gracious Speech to the Commonwealth Prime Ministers who will meet in London in January.
My Lords, I understand that it is a tradition on these occasions to be, so far as possible, non-controversial in the Party sense. I will endeavour to uphold this tradition, difficult as it may be, and against my nature. I feel rather like a bad skater on thin ice.
Our debate on the Address takes place against a sombre, even tragic, background in many areas of the world. In Vietnam the fighting, with all its untold suffering, still continues in spite of countless efforts to stop the hostilities. In the Federal Republic of Nigeria, we are still witnessing the pitiable horror of the civil war which claims a multitude of victims every day. In the Middle East, the situation is still extremely tense with the ever-present danger of fresh armed conflict. My Lords, 1968 is Human Rights Year, but in Czechoslovakia the attempt of a people to regain certain basic human rights is slowly but ruthlessly being suppressed by Soviet military might, an act which invoked in my generation painful memories of thirty years ago. As a result of this brutal action, the détente between East and West, which has given hope to millions throughout the world, has now received a serious setback.
In my view, my Lords, we must not lose hope and must continue our dialogue with the Communist world with the aim of achieving a genuine East-West understanding. But a dialogue is a different thing from appeasement, and we must at the same time support the North Atlantic

13
Alliance, as indicated in the gracious Speech. It is easy, therefore, to realise how far away we are from living in a peaceful world. It is a world in which, to paraphrase the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the small and militarily weak States of the world—as the overwhelming majority of States are —can only hope to control their own affairs in so far as they do nothing to displease a powerful neighbour.
I welcome the reference in the gracious Speech to the Government's intention to continue to use their influence to bring about a negotiated settlement in Vietnam. I am also encouraged that the gracious Speech indicates that the Government will continue to give their full support to the work of the United Nations and to efforts to ensure a greater degree of arms control and the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. At a time when the Charter of the United Nations and the whole principle of the rule of law, as opposed to the use of force, is challenged, this support is more than ever called for.
We have all at times felt a sense of frustration and exasperation at the workings and the imperfections of the United Nations, but in my view it is the only forum where the different nations of the world, with one notable absentee, can meet and explore the possibility of peaceful solutions to their problems. If words and reason ever become more powerful than force in the solution of problems between countries, the United Nations will justly be given a very large share of the credit.
Turning to home affairs, it is obvious that the first priority of any Government must be to strengthen the economy and to achieve a satisfactory balance of payments surplus. The gracious Speech makes it abundantly clear that this will be the overriding concern of Her Majesty's Government. As is the custom in your Lordships' House, there will no doubt be many speeches on the subject of the economy, and as usual a day has been set aside for this purpose. I would only say, therefore, that I regard it as particularly encouraging that there is evidence that at long last we are getting an appreciable increase in productivity. I am sure that it is appropriate to pay tribute to the great efforts that have been made by so many firms, large and small, up and down the country, to increase
14
their exports. They have been ably assisted by the Export Services Branch of the Board of Trade and the results are reflected in the encouraging export figures for the last two months.
I should now like to dwell for a moment on a problem that may seem rather remote from the contents of the gracious Speech but which will, in my opinion, require much attention in the years ahead. This is the growing gap between Government and governed. It is present at several different levels: in the relationship between central and local government and the electorate, between the regions and Whitehall, between management and workers in the world of business and between students and authorities in our universities. Although its causes are as numerous as its symptoms, basically, in my opinion, it is due to a feeling that too many decisions are taken in secret, without consulting those whose vital interests are affected, and without any attempt to explain or to justify them.
I am referring to decisions that affect man as a citizen in the community, as a worker on the factory floor and last, but not least, as a consumer. In other words, it is really a problem of human relations and communications, and it is extraordinary that is the modern world, where we have quicker and better means of communication than ever before, the outcome is often so disappointing. To some extent this is due to the growing complexity of the decisions demanded of government, business and other centres of authority. Closely allied with this is the rapidly increasing size of modern technological industry brought about by mergers and takeovers, the scale of Government operations and the size of the modern university campus compared with that of the ancient seats of learning. Thus decisions taken by authority at all levels affect a very much larger number of people than in the past. At the same time, however, the responsibility for taking such decisions tends to be concentrated in a fairly small group of bureaucrats and technocrats, who may possess the necessary specialised skills and knowledge but who are often too remote from the public and insensitive to public concern and criticism.

15
Understandably, this leads to a degree of dissatisfaction with our democratic processes. There is a feeling among a minority that our system of Parliamentary democracy is outmoded and that reforms can be brought about only by extra-Parliamentary means, a feeling that is often exploited by certain minority groups for their own ends. I am sure that no such feeling exists in your Lordships' House. Although it may be fashionable to attack and belittle our Parliamentary system in certain quarters, I am convinced that your Lordships would agree that it is something we can be proud of and is among the best in the world. I fully agree with the Home Secretary who, speaking recently in another place, said that our Parliamentary system was frequently a bulwark and a protection for the individual in society. However, Parliamentary and other institutions, just like successful business organisations, in my opinion, cannot remain static without running the risk of decay. We must face up, therefore, to the fact that there should be a continuous process of adapting a Parliamentary and Government machinery to a rapidly changing world. The twin enemies of the good society are anarchy and apathy and we must be on our guard against them both. One of the tragedies of violence is that those who engage in it do not always realise that it is counter-productive and strengthens the resistance to the reforms they advocate.
The most fashionable current panacea for the alienation of government and governed is participation. The difficulty is that this term seems to have as many different meanings as advocates. To take just one example, in industry participation means profit sharing to some and an active part in decision making to others. Experience leads me to believe that the majority of people do not want the worry and responsibility of decision making. What they want is to feel that their views and vital interests are fully considered, and that the subsequent decisions are explained and justified rather than handed down in the form of a diktat. To some extent, it is a matter of human relations, of good communications and of devising a system which ensures that the voice of those affected is heard and taken into account.
16
The gracious Speech contains the outline of several new measures that have a bearing on the solution of these problems. These include electoral law reform, the lowering of the voting age from 21 to 18 and the implementation of the Latey proposals on the age of majority. There are proposals also for action on the Report of the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers' Associations which could have a beneficial effect on management-worker relations. I welcome the indication that the Government will endeavour to make fuller use of resources in the regions. This is wholly desirable and, provided that the Regional Economic Planning Councils are fully consulted, it should lead to an improvement in relations between the regions and central government.
My Lords, the gracious Speech contains also the very important announcement that Her Majesty's Government will begin consultations on the appointment of a Commission on the Constitution. I find it encouraging that, in considering the changes that may be needed, it will have particular regard to the relationship between the central government and the several countries, nations and regions of the United Kingdom.
Next, my Lords, we come to the reform of your Lordships' House. I am aware that this is a controversial matter, although no doubt most of your Lordships would agree that some reform is desirable. This Chamber is an integral part of our parliamentary system and, in my opinion, should therefore be subject to the same process of change, improvement and adaptation as others of our leading institutions. Only in this way can we continue to do our work effectively and to the best advantage of our country. May I express a personal hope that any changes that might be introduced will be the result of the largest possible measure of agreement among your Lordships. Naturally, we are all deeply interested, and I wonder whether my noble friend the leader of the House can indicate when the White Paper is likely to be published.
My Lords, the programme outlined in the gracious Speech, and other important matters that will arise, will no doubt give us a lively and stimulating Session. As always, however much our views may differ, we shall discuss the problems,

17
issues and suggested solutions constructively and with our usual tolerance, good humour and dignity, always bearing in mind the interests of our country and all its people. My Lords, I beg to second my noble friend's Motion for an humble Address.
4.26 p.m.
LORD CARRINGTON: My Lords, I beg to move that this debate be adjourned until to-morrow, but before the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack puts the Question it is my pleasant duty, on behalf of those who sit on these Benches, to congratulate the Mover and Seconder of the humble Address. We follow rather a curious procedure in these matters. Her Majesty's Government, through the Queen's Speech, have outlined to us the measures that they propose should become law this Session. With some of them no doubt we shall disagree; some we shall support, and some are as yet an unknown quantity.
Then, the House having better regulated Select Vestries, the first two speeches of the new Session, so far from explaining the legislation or making a case for it, are by custom delivered by those who have had no part in framing the gracious Speech and who are not expected, if any of the measures are controversial, to say one word in their support. Indeed, while the Mover and the Seconder are making their speeches many of us are trying to find a controversial sentence or two in order that we can become indignant that they have so far allowed themselves to express opinions which all of us know perfectly well they hold. The three Leaders of the Parties are then expected to congratulate them, regardless of how well they have done or how much they have bored the House. On this occasion, however, I can truthfully say that the two noble Lords have not been boring. We have been very lucky indeed in the two speeches that we have heard, and I congratulate them both most sincerely.
The noble Lord, Lord Delacourt-Smith, has not been a Member of your Lordships' House for very long: indeed, I think he made his maiden speech only in January this year, and I confess to my shame that until this afternoon I had not had the pleasure of hearing the noble Lord speak. But having heard him today, I have no doubt that he will be an
18
excellent and valuable addition to your Lordships' House. He has already had a most distinguished career. He was Member of Parliament for Colchester from 1945 until he was defeated in 1950; and under another Labour Government he has become a Member of your Lordships' House. For the sake of this House, as well as I hope for his own, I am glad to think that unless the Bill to be introduced by the Government on the reform of your Lordships' House changes things a great deal, he will have more security of tenure on this occasion than on the previous one.
The noble Lord, as I have said, has had a distinguished career, and he has for the last 15 years been General Secretary of the Post Office Engineering Union. The Post Office has been in some controversy lately, and I hope it will not be expressing too extreme a view to say that there are a number of people who are not entirely satisfied with the service it provides. But I should like to put on record one thing for which I am very grateful —and I do not know to what extent I am indebted to the noble Lord opposite. In spite of the fact that I live under fifty miles from London, I have for the last thirty years experienced the pleasures of a manual telephone exchange, which provides a courteous and personal service, but of a somewhat unpredictable and uneven kind. Three days ago, to the astonishment of all in my area, we went on to an automatic exchange, and. having learned how to dial, we are now finding this wonderful new invention a great boon. So I am as grateful to the noble Lord and his engineers for that as I am for the speech that he has made this afternoon.
The noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, is a much more senior Member of your Lordships' House, and knowing the skill with which the noble Lord the Leader of the House operates in these matters I have no doubt that, apart from Lord Sainsbury's own many personal qualities, one of the reasons he was chosen, so to speak, was because he represented the other half of our industrial scene. For he is the representative on that side of the employers. If I may say so, he made a very thoughtful and interesting speech —indeed as one might expect, because Lord Sainsbury is an excellent example of the hereditary system. He inherited his business from his father, who inherited

19
it from his father; and he has improved it and made it more valuable by his good sense and hard work, and no doubt he will pass it on to his family. Well, what could be better than that, and what more natural? And I only hope I am doing the noble Lord no harm by this mild and helpful reflection.
But, apart from making such a success of his own business, he has of course been interested in a very large number of subjects, from education to agriculture, to health; and, like so many others in a similar position, has put in a great deal of public work. I cannot help thinking, however, that his first love must be his own business, for I notice that he has called himself Lord Sainsbury, of Drury Lane, and unless he has a marked affection for the musical plays which are put on at that theatre, I think he must have chosen that title because of the associations with Covent Garden and the enterprise over which he has presided for so many years.
My Lords, both noble Lords have done well in presenting what appears to be a good pie without any of the natural advantages of good ingredients—in fact, one might call it a "Woolton pie", if that were not an insult to the memory of a great man and a disgusting dish. Not only have the noble Lords distinguished themselves this afternoon, but by their presence they add distinction to your Lordships' House.
We shall have an opportunity later this week and next week to discuss the detailed provisions of the gracious Speech, and therefore I do not propose to make any comment on them this afternoon. But in the speech there is reference to legislation which will be introduced to reform this House. This is not, of course, entirely unexpected. In point of fact, we have heard it before. We do not officially know, though some of us have a very good idea, what the Government propose, and I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, will perhaps take up the invitation made by Lord Sainsbury and tell the House this afternoon whether or not there is to be a White Paper, and, if so, when it will be published. But I should like to say this to noble Lords opposite. We shall, of course, examine their proposals on their merits, and we shall not be deflected by the very un-
20
fortunate way in which negotiations were broken off in the inter-Party Committee last summer. At any rate, here in this Chamber almost everybody—I hope perhaps everybody, but at any rate almost everybody—wants to see a Second Chamber which is an integral, an authoritative, a useful and a respected part of the Constitution; and it will be our aim on this side to see that the Bill which the Government are introducing will do just that.
Moved, That the debate be adjourned until to-morrow.—(Lord Carrington.)
4.33 p.m.
LORD BYERS: My Lords, I rise to second the Motion so ably put to your Lordships by the noble Lord, Lord Carrington. Whatever one may feel about the merits or demerits of the gracious Speech, the occasion for congratulating the Mover and the Seconder of the humble Address is always one which gives great pleasure, and I do indeed congratulate the two noble Lords for the way in which they have acquitted themselves to-day. As the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, said, we have had two excellent speeches. I know only too well how difficult it is in politics to make a non-controversial speech. I congratulate them again. I have known the two noble Lords long enough to be sure that they would discharge their duties to-day with courtesy and with the sincerity which always commends itself to your Lordships' House. I have known the noble Lord who moved the Address since we both sat in the House of Commons in 1945. In fact, the other place dispensed with our services on the same day, so we have something in common.
The more one looks back over one's political lifetime, the more one realises how little politics change. I remember in 1947 the then Mr. Charles Smith asking the Secretary of State for the Colonies what the Government were proposing to do about the men previously employed in the Malta Dockyard, and where extra work was going to be found for them. He was told that this of course was a matter for the new Maltese Government, and not the responsibility of Her Majesty's Government. But perhaps some things do change, because on that occasion the reply came from my noble friend Lord Ogmore, who was at that time answering for the Labour Party. I

21
am delighted to know that we now have him on these Benches, even if their Lordships opposite have Lord Sainsbury on theirs.
I remember also the noble Lord who moved the Address to-day putting down Questions to the Prime Minister of that day, asking for a clearer definition of the responsibilities of the different Ministers who were dealing with economic affairs. I have often meant to ask him whether he ever received an answer, because I am quite sure that that problem has not been solved yet, either. We are all conscious of the excellent work which the noble Lord, Lord Delacourt-Smith, has done for postal workers over a period of many years—and I was glad to see that his long exposure to Post Office matters had not affected his delivery.
The noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, and his family are far too well known for their great public service and their great work in business to need any embellishments from me, but, as I say, we can take some credit for the contributions which the noble Lord has made throughout his life because his early political training took place in the hard school of Liberalism. I am very sorry indeed that in the three Elections which he fought on our behalf he was not successful. But we are delighted to have him on the Benches opposite and to know that this House has the benefit of his experience.
I would not wish to conclude without some reference to the noble Lord the Leader of the House, Lord Shackleton. He started out as the Lord Privy Seal he became the Paymaster General, and he is now back again as Lord Privy Seal. I do not suppose that any Cabinet Minister has ever kissed hands quite so often while retaining the same job. I want to refer to him because on this occasion, when we have a proposal for reforming this Chamber, this House of Lords, I should like to say, as one who has worked closely with him, what a tremendous contribution he has made in the past year to the research which has gone into the study of House of Lords reform. I express the hope that at an appropriate moment, in addition to any White Paper or any Bill, the background statements, or at least some of them, which show the reasoning and the thought processes behind the proposal, might be made available to the
22
public, in order to help public discussion, because, quite frankly, many of my views were changed by the opportunity which I had of studying the matter in greater depth than I. had had before. My Lords, once again I congratulate the Mover and the Seconder of the humble Address, and I beg to second the Motion proposed by Lord Carrington.
4.37 p.m.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (LORD SHACKLETON): My Lords, I should first like to echo the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Byers, and the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, on the high quality of the speeches of the two noble Lords who moved and seconded the humble Address. The noble Lord, Lord Carrington, is quite right: the choice was made for the reason he gave. But the obvious is sometimes the best. I am sure the noble Lord. Lord Carrington, and the House will agree that in the noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, we have an industrialist who combines high idealism with high standards of competitive efficiency. I have myself been in competition with the noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, And I know how often members of my firm were reluctant to use the name of the controlling organisation (which was not used in the food side) but used to say that we would use the firm's controlling name when we got our food side up to the standard of Sainsbury's. I accept that he is a good example of the hereditary system. I have never been one who has suggested that there were not some quite good "hereditaries" around, and we see them particularly among many of your Lordships in this House.
The noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, like the noble Lord, Lord Delacourt-Smith, has touched on the most crucial aspects of the Queen's Speech. They have woven their remarks into a philosophy which certainly we on our side of the House deeply feet, and one which I believe is also acceptable to all noble Lords. I think it was notable that the voice of the noble Lord, Lord Delacourt-Smith—I stress this point to noble Lords—represented the authentic voice of the trade union movement. We so often hear criticisms of trade unions. Yet here we had exactly the right emphasis in the basic thinking of the experienced trade union leader, of whom we have a number of very notable representatives in this

23
House. That emphasis was on change within an orderly society and the protection of the weak against the harshness and inhumanity of simple market forces, land yet also on technological advance, with its discomforts and opportunities and hopes of the future.
My noble friend spoke both as a trade union secretary and as an ex-colleague in the Commons, and it was interesting that he focused his attention on a matter which I know has interested your Lordships very much—the problem of scientists, engineers and technologists in industry, and the Swan Report, the Dainton Report and others. They were the sort of remarks that one would expect from a man who, in addition to being a trade union secretary. was also a scholar of Wadham. I think both noble Lords can be gratified by their performance to-day—we certainly are.
My Lords, it is customary on these occasions for the Leaders of the Parties and for the spokesman for the Government to make comparatively short speeches, and I do not intend to depart significantly from that admirable custom. However, there are clearly one or two points on which I believe it would be helpful to noble Lords if I were to say something. In making these remarks I am conscious that 1 am doing so for the first time as Leader of your Lordships' House. My predecessor was a noble Lord who led us with idealism and affection and—what I do not have to the same extent, I fear —a great deal of wit. I sometimes compare noble Lords, and listening to the noble Lord, Lord Carrington. and the noble Earl, Lord Longford, I used to think that the Leader of the Opposition, to speak in fencing parlance, by the rapidity of his riposts and the sharpness of his point wielded an épée. He was a dangerous man to interrupt—very dangerous indeed, particularly when he was actually leading and had the last word. His wounds were very quick; they smarted, but you recovered from them quickly.
The noble Earl, Lord Longford, was rather more the master of the foil. The delicacy of his touch and his wit were such that I cannot emulate. But there is one weapon which on the whole we eschew in this House, and that is the sabre. We do not chop one another to
24
pieces here. This sometimes gives rise to a misleading atmosphere of "cosiness". However we ought not to be misled by this; we know what we are about. We disagree on certain things, but we can face our differences with a degree of mutual respect which has been apparent in the speeches so far to-day, which enables us to make the contribution which I think this House is particularly able to provide and which I believe it will provide in the future.
May I now say a word on the conduct of business? Noble Lords will recall that last year, early in the summer, we had a useful debate on the conduct of this House. A good deal of concern was expressed about the way business was being conducted and the pressure on your Lordships' House, and constructive suggestions were made. In the event, we got through our business rather well, and I should like to pay a tribute to noble Lords—to the noble Earl, Lord St. Aldwyn, to the noble Lords the Leaders of the Conservative and the Liberal Parties, and to other noble Lords and, in particular, to my noble friend the Government Chief Whip the Captain of the Gentlemen-at-Arms. We know the difficulties—our inability, because of our very flexible procedure. to plan accurately— but we shall do our best again to meet the convenience of the House. I am well aware that "consultation through the usual channels" does not necessarily mean that we are suiting everybody in the House. This must be the essence of the duty of the Leader of the House. He has to wear two hats: he is the Leader of Government business, but subject always to the agreement and support of the House. He is the guardian of the interests of us all.
We shall have some important business in this Session If noble Lords were inclined to think that there is not very much which it is easy to focus upon in the Queen's Speech, this is partly because the traditional phrases mask, as they always do, rather than reveal, the full importance. I must confess that when I was reading what I thought was the Queen's Speech—and I hope this will not be held against me—before it was published, I thought, "This is very good", and then I realised that I was reading the Prorogation Speech. There is a certain similarity about agriculture

25
and white fish and visits abroad; but some of these are significant. The noble Lord, Lord Carrington, like myself, will, I am sure, particularly welcome the visit of Her Majesty to Chile and to other countries in South America. It is a delightful country in which I am sure she will find a warm welcome.
There is some important business to conduct, and there is one area which I should like to mention briefly at the moment although I do not doubt that a good deal will be said about it to-morrow. I refer to the emphasis in the gracious Speech on law reform. My noble and learned friend on the Woolsack is making a unique and great contribution to the reform of law in this country. It is indeed some of the most solid reform in which your Lordships have been engaged, and I certainly would not attempt to detail it. However, I would point to the fact that it will figure importantly, and your Lordships are particularly well qualified to help in this process.
Mention has been made of several important measures, including the development of the social security and welfare services. Before the end of the year there will be a White Paper on the Donovan Report, and, of course, the Post Office Bill. Judging by the questions which my noble friend Lord Bowles has had to answer recently I do not doubt that some lively comments will be made. but I am sure they will not involve any reflection on that admirable institution, my noble friend's union, the Post Office Engineering Union.
May I just give the House a little information on the Constitutional Commission?—and here I might give some indication, because this is a matter for consultation, as to possible terms of reference for the Royal Commission. Of course these are not final: they are intended merely to give an indication of what the Royal Commission might be charged to do. The terms might be:
"To examine the present functions of the central Legislature and Government in relation to the several countries, nations and regions of the United Kingdom; to consider, having regard to developments in local government organisation and in the administrative and other relationships between the various parts of the United Kingdom, what changes, in the interests of prosperity and good government, are desirable in those functions or otherwise in present constitutional and economic relation
26
ships; and to consider also whether any changes are desirable in the constitutional and economic relationships between the United Kingdom and the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man."
We all know what this is about We may all have views on the subject of Scottish nationalism or Welsh nationalism, or Cornish nationalism, and one thing on which I am sure we are all agreed is that it is high time the whole subject was brought out into the open and properly discussed on the basis of ascertainable facts. I personally believe profoundly in the unity of the United Kingdom; but there are strong feelings, and the important thing is to bring these forward and to give them the fullest consideration. It is important that the Commission should be constituted with a membership that is able to understand the viewpoints of the different parts of Britain and to evaluate them objectively.
The fact that this major examination is taking place is of course no reason for not pressing on with other desirable reforms. We shall shortly have the Report of the Maud Committee; and there one can never wait for the ideal moment to do everything one wants to do. That is why the Government have decided that they will press on with the reform of the House of Lords. I do not propose to discuss the situation in which the talks were broken off. We could exchange remarks; we could tease one another on this. But the important thing now is to see that the work of that conference is not wasted. And if the noble Lord, Lord Byers—and I am grateful for his remarks—had not paid a tribute to me, I was going to sly to your Lordships that a very great deal of hard work was done, particularly by the noble Lord, Lord Byers, the noble Earl, Lord jellicoe, and the noble Lord, Lord Carrington.
I must stress that in a reform of this kind there are difficulties. We have, perhaps happily, no Department for the Constitution. It was necessary to carry out a great deal of fundamental work, to carry out studies, and a large number of papers were produced. Unfortunately, as the process went on papers succeeded others as ideas developed. I should have liked, and indeed originally suggested, that the working papers should be published. But I can say that all the arguments that have gone on and as many

27
of the vital facts as possible will appear in a White Paper, and this White Paper will, under present plans, be published before the end of this week.
I have a deep affection for this House. I believe in two-Chamber Government. I also believe that this House has potentialities which can develop further. It may be helpful if I say that the opening passages, the principles on which the reform might take place and which motivate the Government are, first, that in the framework of a modern parliamentary system the Second Chamber has an essential role to play, complementary to but not rivalling that of the Commons; secondly, the reform should be directed towards promoting the more efficient working of Parliament as a whole; and thirdly, once the reform has been completed the work of the two Houses should become more closely co-ordinated and integrated and the functions of the House of Lords should be further reviewed. This last passage, of course, must apply after House of Lords reform. It is not for the Government to say how Parliament should conduct its business. We can bring forward proposals, and legislation will, I hope, be accepted by Parliament. As I say, by the end of the week a White Paper will be published and we propose to have a very early debate on it in your Lordships' House.
In conclusion, may I say that in any reform of any institution one has to take into account the human factor. It is exceedingly difficult to reform a body from outside. It is a danger into which academics, admirable though they may be, are apt to fall when they look at any institution and try to describe how it works. It is exceedingly difficult to describe how an institution works unless you have been closely associated with it, and of no institution is this more true than your Lordships' House. I believe that the Second Chamber, with emphasis perhaps on the best qualities of your Lordships' House, in which I believe there are many quite unique qualities not to be be found in other Second Chambers in the world, has a part to play of great importance, even though—and we have long recognised this in practice—it is a complementary one to another place.
There may be great controversy, and the controversy may come from the Right
28
or it may come from the Left, but I believe there is a body of good sense which will recognise that the solutions which are put forward are reasonable and sensible and thoroughly in accordance with British constitutional tradition. I fear it would be unwise of me if I were now to attempt to describe them. It is important that your Lordships should read the full Paper, the arguments and the proposals. I would only stress that I believe that the solution will enable all of us here—and I stress "all of us here" —to continue to make a contribution of importance to the continued progress and prosperity of our country and to support ideals and, above all, the tolerance which we so uniquely have in Britain.
On Question, Motion agreed to, and debate adjourned accordingly.

CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES
LORD SHACKLETON: My Lords, I beg to move that the Earl of Listowel be appointed to take the Chair in all Committees of this House for this Session.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to, nemine dissentiente.
Committee for the Journals— Appointed.
Stoppages in the Streets—Order to prevent, renewed.

JUDICIAL BUSINESS (APPELLATE COMMITTEES)
4.55 p.m.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD GARDINER): My Lords, I rise to propose to the House a Motion which I hope your Lordships will be willing to consider without Notice. The Motion is the usual Motion for the appointment of Appellate Committees.
Your Lordships will remember that before the war appeals to your Lordships' House were always heard in this Chamber in the mornings and until four o'clock, because the House did not meet for other business until 4.30. But when, during the war, their Lordships, perhaps

29
not unnaturally, wished to get home before the air raids started it was determined that they must meet earlier, and, despite the strong objections of the late noble and learned Viscount, Lord Simon, it was decided to appoint a Sessional Committee, the Appellate Committee. Since then, as your Lordships know, that Committee has heard cases in a Committee Room upstairs to which they are referred by the Whole House for inquiry and report; and then, in the mornings, after Prayers, the senior noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack moves that the appeal be dismissed, or as the case may be. There are, in fact, two such Appellate Committees. These arc quite distinct from the Appeal Committee, which hears Petitions for leave to appeal. The reason for having two Appellate Committees of which all noble and learned Lords qualified to be members are members, is simply to enable two cases to be heard by different Committees at the same time if the state of business so requires.
My Lords, the reason why no Notice has been given of this Motion is due to circumstances which have happened more than once in the past. Under the relevant Acts and Orders, the Appellate Committees may sit during and after Prorogation but cannot, of course, sit again once Her Majesty has opened the new Session until they have been appointed. There is an appeal which is in process of being heard at the moment, an important appeal, the>Attorney General V. Nissan, which has been continued since Prorogation and which should be continued again tomorrow morning before this House has sat again. In similar circumstances the House has thought it right to allow this Motion to be moved without prior notice, and I hope that your Lordships may be prepared to do so again on this occasion. The Motion is in the usual form, and I accordingly beg to move that this House, in discharge of its constitutional duty to act as the ultimate tribunal in appeals
30
from England, Scotland and Northern Ireland, orders that two Committees, each of which shall include all Lords qualified under Section 5 of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876, as amended by any subsequent enactment, be appointed to hear, during the present Session, such appeals as may be referred to them in order to secure the due expedition of Public and Judicial Business; and that the Committees have leave to report to the House from time to time.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

RECALL OF THE HOUSE DURING AN ADJOURNMENT
5.0 p.m.
LORD SHACKLETON: My Lords, I beg to move to resolve that whenever during the present Session of Parliament the House stands adjourned, and it appears to the satisfaction of the Lord Chancellor (or, if the Lord Chancellor is unable to act owing to illness or other cause, to the satisfaction of the Lord Chairman of Committees after consultation with Her Majesty's Government) that the public interest requires that the House should meet at any earlier time during such adjournment, the Lord Chancellor or the Lord Chairman of Committees, as the case may be, may give notice to the Peers that he is so satisfied and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such Notice, and shall transact its business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

ROLL OF THE LORDS
Prepared by the Clerk of the Parliaments: Ordered to lie on the Table, and to be printed.
House adjourned at one minute past five o'clock.