THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (EARL JELLICOE)My Lords, yesterday afternoon I decided, after consultation through the usual channels, that it would be for the convenience of the House if a Statement on National Insurance uprating was not repeated here, because of its length and because of its detailed nature. It has been represented to me on more than one occasion, and indeed from all quarters of your Lordships' House, that we should wherever possible seek to avoid the interruption of debates. On this occasion, and in my then knowledge of the contents of the Statement, I agreed with this view and with the corollary that we should not come between the Welsh in their important preoccupations yesterday.
Since then, my Lords, some noble Lords have made representations to me that they would have wished the Statement to have been repeated here. I can only say to those noble Lords who are interested in this subject—and understandably so—that I am sorry they were disappointed. It is always very difficult to decide which Statements should be repeated in this House and which should not, and yesterday's new procedure, whereby the text of the Statement was circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT, was a genuine attempt to meet an admitted difficulty. I should like to say that I very much regret that the Statement, as finally made by my right honourable friend, contained details of which the usual channels were not aware when they agreed to its not being repeated here.
That said, I should like to apologise to noble Lords, wherever they are in your Lordships' House, if for that reason they were denied an opportunity which otherwise they would have wished to take of 1446 questioning my noble friend on this matter. I hope your Lordships will accept that there is always—and, I think, inevitably—a difficult balance of convenience to strike between the interests of those who are taking part in a debate, and the interests of those who—again, quite understandably—wish to have Statements repeated in your Lordships' House.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, I understand that this is not a personal Statement on which one cannot comment, but that the noble Earl is explaining, in his capacity as Leader of the House, what happened in a very unfortunate way. I think the noble Earl has apologised to the House. It was not a very forthright apology, I am bound to say. This is a matter of great difficulty for any Leader, or indeed for the usual channels who have to make a judgment of this kind. But this Statement ultimately contained material of a highly contenious kind and the House as a whole is entitled to have these Statements. There is no doubt that, inadvertently—and I accept that the noble Earl did not know what was in the Statement—he was misled, and so were we. But of course this puts my noble friends who had to help in taking this decision in a very difficult position indeed, and we could be equally blamed for what, I am bound to say (although I realise that these things happen), was a piece of what can only be described as the most extraordinary incompetence on the Government's side. As I said, these things happen and I know that Statements are often prepared at the last moment. But the really crucial material was not available, and I can only wish that the noble Earl had given a rather more forthright apology.