HL Deb 23 July 1969 vol 304 cc986-7

[No. 2]

After Clause 9, insert the following new clause—

Modification of enactments relating to Duke of Cornwall and other children of Her Majesty

".—(1) Section 1 (1) of this Act shall apply for the construction of the expression "minor" in section 2 (2) of the Civil List Act 1952 (which relates to the amount payable for the Queen's Civil List while the Duke of Cornwall is for the time being a minor) and accordingly—

  1. (a) section 2 (2)(b) of that Act (which relates to the three years during which the Duke is over 18 but under 21); and
  2. (b) in section 2 (2) (a) of that Act the words "for each year whilst he is under the age of eighteen years",
are hereby repealed except in relation to any period falling before section 1 of this Act comes into force.

(2) In section 4 (1) (a) of the said Act of 1952 (under which benefits are provided far the children of Her Majesty, other than the Duke of Cornwall, who attains the age of 21 or marry) for the words "twenty-one years" there shall be substituted the words "eighteen years" but no sum shall be payable by virtue of this subSection in respect of any period falling before section 1 of this Act comes into force.

(3) In section 38 of the Duchy of Cornwall Management Act 1863 (under which certain rights and powers of the Duke of Cornwall may. while he is under 21, be exercised on his behalf by the Sovereign or persons acting under Her authority) for the words "twenty-one years" wherever they occur there stall be substituted the words "eighteen years""

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, with Amendment No. 2 I think I can also speak to Amendment No. 11, which is linked with it. This is the matter which has given rise to Her Majesty's consent. It has been agreed, as a matter of principle, that if it is right to fix the age of majority at 18 years for the generality of Her Majesty's subjects it is right to do so for Her Majesty's children; and that there is no logical reason for refraining from applying that principle in the implementation of statutory provisions regarding the application of the Duchy of Cornwall revenues, the discharge of the rights and duties of the Duke of Cornwall in relation to the management of the Duchy estates and revenues, and the payment of annuities from the Consolidated Fund for the younger children of the Queen. These statutory provisions are akin to private settlements in some ways. The age of majority for the purpose of future private settlements will be 18. For existing private settlements it will be 21, but it is of course open to settlors to alter it to 18 if they wish. There seems no reason not to alter these provisions in a similar way.

This case is the stronger, in view of the fact that both the Prince of Wales and Princess Anne, who are over 18, though neither of them is yet 21, have begun to play an independent part in carrying out the duties which fall to other Members of the Royal Family than the Queen herself. This part will undoubtedly steadily increase as older Members of the Family find it necessary to reduce their own commitments. The Duke of Cornwall is, of course, always the Heir Apparent, and as Heir Apparent already comes of full age at 18 for all purposes of the Regency Act 1937, under Section 2 of the Regency Act 1953. I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 2.

Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said Amendment.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

VISCOUNT COLVILLE OF CULROSS

My Lords, as the noble and learned Lord said this is a technical point, but it is one on which it seems to me that the consent and approval of Her Majesty the Queen is really the governing factor. If Her Majesty thinks that this is right in relation to those Statutes which concern members of the Royal Family, then I cannot imagine that any Member of this House would wish to demur. I certainly would not, and I hope that the House will agree to this new clause.

On Question, Motion agreed to.