HL Deb 08 May 1969 vol 301 cc1267-8

3.10 p.m.


My Lords, at a convenient moment after half-past three my noble friend the Leader of the House will be making a Statement on the industrial dispute at Her Majesty's Stationery Office.

It may be convenient for the House if I inform your Lordships that, subject to the progress of business, it is intended that we should rise for the Whitsun Recess on Thursday, May 22 and return on Monday, June 9.


My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for giving the House that statement. May I ask why we should come back on Monday the 9th? This House usually reassembles after a Recess on a Tuesday.


My Lords, probably the noble Earl did not hear me say that I was proposing that the House should rise on Thursday, May 22 until Monday, June 9. That seems a very reasonable Recess. I phrased it in that way because I thought, after consultation, that it was better it should be done in that way. One of the Bills we hoped to take on Thursday the 22nd is unlikely to be with us, and most noble Lords will find it more convenient if they are told that we are coming back on the 9th, and learn later, if the Bill does not arrive early enough, that we shall come back on the 10th, rather than the other way round.


My Lords, can the noble Lord give us an undertaking that there will be enough business to keep the House occupied for the rest of the summer? I understand that now that the Parliament (No. 2) Bill is dropped and the fate of the Industrial Relations Bill is uncertain we may find that there is not enough to do. So why come back on a Monday?


My Lords, if the noble Lord's venture into—I will not say the unknown, but the future, proves to be justified, we may even come back on the Tuesday.


My Lords, do I understand that we are coming back one day earlier to take the Divorce Law Reform Bill? Is the noble Lord sure that he is going to get it?


My Lords, there happens to be other business: the Bill I had in mind was the Post Office Bill.