LORDS AMENDMENT AND COMMONS REASON (Hansard, 27 July 1972)

§ LORD POLWARTH
My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth not insist on their Amendment No. 2 to which the Commons have disagreed. This is because it is thought desirable that certain provisions of the Bill should be brought into force before the expiration of a period of one month from the date on which it is passed. The provision for the Commencement Order was originally incorporated in the Bill at the Report stage in another place. As some of your Lordships will recollect, at the Report stage in this House it was deleted amidst what I can only describe as a measure of confusion for which I must accept my full share of responsibility, though I do not think the confusion was entirely limited to this side of the House. I understand that the affair has already been enshrined in Hansard of another place under the description of the "Polwarth muddle". I felt a few moments ago that I was in good company on this matter. I hope I do not have this effect on any other noble Lords on the Bench beside me. Perhaps your Lordships will agree that I should not detain you unduly by going over in detail the purpose of this clause. The effect in brief is that, by enabling provisions of the Bill to be brought into force at any time after the Royal Assent, local authorities will be given the maximum possible time to prepare for playing their part in implementing their responsibilities under the measure. I beg to move.

§ LORD HOY
My Lords, I should like to say how much I personally disagree with the Commons with regard to this Amendment. This particular clause has a long record. When it was first put into the Bill in another place the Government slipped it in at the last minute and, as a consequence of the Guillotine 1511 Motion, it was never discussed in another place. The matter came to your Lordships' House and we had a little more time to deal with it. I will not describe it as the " Polwarth muddle " or as anyone else's muddle. I think that for the first time Members of Parliament had a little time to consider the matter and, very rightly, came to the conclusion that it ought not to be in the Bill and threw it out. The noble Lord says that the reason is that local authorities must have time to consider the legislation, but he knows perfectly well that that is not correct. There was an instance quoted in another place yesterday. By Statute, the Town Council of Dundee never meet during the month of August. If they want to change the rule they have to give a year's notice to do so. Whatever might be done, that council cannot deal with this legislation. There are many other local authorties—and this must be known to your Lordships—who do not meet during August at all. I think that your Lordships' House rightly came to the decision, with the concurrence of the Government. that this provision ought to be thrown out of the Bill. For the first time we did it unanimously. I do not know about its being done inadvertently; I would not accuse the Government of being so incompetent. The Bill went back to another place, and the Government decided to contradict your Lordships and to put the provision back in again.

§ LORD DENHAM
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Hoy, is not quite right in saying that we did it unanimously. I understand that certain noble Lords on the other side of the House said that they were " Not Content " on that Amendment.

§ LORD HOY
My Lords, all I want to say is that the decision of your Lordships was recorded as a unanimous one. No Division took place. This unanimity was all-pervading. We thought we were entitled to a little more respect from another place. The fact that your Lordships, having reaching a unanimous decision, should have it thrown back at them again is intolerable. Furthermore, the reason the noble Lord, Lord Polwarth, has given to-day for asking us to agree is not correct. But I must leave it to your Lordships to decide whether we should 1512 say to another place, "We have considered the matter very politely, and we have reached the conclusion that we ought to insist on our opinion as the best one that we have formed so far."

§ LORD SHACKLETON
My Lords, are we to have no reply from the noble Lord? In view of the fact that noble Lords opposite tend to persist in their error and failure to understand the procedure of the House, I am shocked that the Acting Chief Whip should have said that the House was not united on this matter. There was no Division on the Amendment. The decision to accept it was unanimous, because if a decision is arrived at nem. con., or with nobody voting against,—and nobody did vote against it—it reaches its final stages by unanimous decision. I think that the noble Lord ought to take some instructions in procedure if he is to advise us.
I am deeply worried for the Government. The noble Lord, Lord Polwarth, has stood, as I thought unnecessarily, in sackcloth and ashes. It is the responsibility of the Whips to see that their side votes correctly. I must support my noble friend in this matter. This Amendment was seriously discussed and was voted on in another place. I must object to Ministers in another place suggesting that my noble friend Lord Hughes was in a muddle on this matter. We do our best to help the Government, If they shout, "Wrong" we try to shout, "Right" for them. I even tried to point out that the Government were in trouble because this is the chivalry that the Opposition—at any rate, the present Opposition—always show to an incompetent Government. Now the noble Lord, Lord Denham, comes along and says that the decision here was not unanimous. I can only say that if the noble Lord persists in this we can refer the matter to the Procedure Committee; or, if he wishes, we can now adjourn the debate in order to get the matter clear before the Government fall into more trouble. The fact is that the Opposition very quickly knew the position after being misled. I do not blame the noble Lord, Lord Polwarth, in this matter. It is unfair to talk about the "Polwarth muddle". I resent that, and I think it is in the Acting Chief Whip's department that the inquiry has to take place.

§ LORD POLWARTH
My Lords, while thanking the noble Lord most warmly for his efforts, however belated, on that occasion to extricate me from that position, may I address myself in reply to the point raised on the subject of the Amendment by the noble Lord, Lord Hoy? He said, quite rightly, that certain local authorities do not meet during the month of August. Nevertheless, there are others who do, and this will enable work to be proceeded with by officials and by others in the meanwhile and therefore reduce the rush at the last moment.