FAIR TRADING BILL (Hansard, 15 June 1973)

§ LORD DRUMALBYN
My Lords, I beg leave to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRY
My Lords, I wonder whether I might raise a point here. I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Drumalbyn, will recall 981 that on Second Reading on June 5 I raised a matter which I had raised in 1967 when the Opposition were in Government. In 1967 the matter I raised was to the effect that while the then Government, which was my Government, stressed the importance of consumer legislation, we always found matters dealing with consumer legislation at the back of the queue when Parliamentary business was put down. The noble Lord, Lord Drumalbyn, may recall that in 1967 he gave me his support on this particular matter, as indeed did the noble Baroness, Lady Elliot of Harwood, together with most of the other speakers in that debate. It may be that I have misunderstood the information that I thought that I had got, but I was under the impression that on Tuesday the Committee on the Fair Trading Bill was to be first business. I wonder whether the noble Lord, Lord Drumalbyn, could help me on this: in to-day's Minutes and Proceedings I see that, far from being first business, it is down as last business, or. in other words, fourth. Could the noble Lord tell the House whether this is correct, or whether the order in the Minutes should not be taken as such?

§ LORD DRUMALBYN
My Lords, this is more a matter for the usual channels than it is for me. I am afraid that I cannot reply to the noble Baroness on that point.

§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRY
My Lords, the Minister is the Minister in charge of the Bill, and I raised this with him last Tuesday. Is he telling the House that he, as Minister, has no idea when this business will arise on Tuesday or what will precede it? That seems an incredible situation.

§ LORD DRUMALBYN
My Lords, it is the case that the Fair Trading Bill comes as the last order of business on that day. This is something which has been arranged through the usual channels.

§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRY
My Lords, could the noble Lord answer my question? Could he, as Minister, for the convenience of people who have other work to do and who are interested in this Bill, give any indication as to when he, as Minister in charge, would hope that this business of the Fair Trading Bill might commence on Tuesday?

EARL ST. ALDWYN
My Lords, I think that perhaps it was really at the request of noble Lords opposite that this order of business was agreed. As the noble Lord said, we shall be taking the Water Bill first, and it is a little difficult to forecast exactly how long it will take. Obviously it will be expedited as much as possible. I really cannot forecast at this stage how long the Water Bill will take.

§ LORD SHACKLETON
My Lords, I assume that at the moment we are debating the Motion on the Order Paper, or has the point been raised on Business? If it is the Motion on the Order Paper, I can only speak once, but it does mean that I can say, rather than do it interrogatively, that, as I understand it, while the noble Lord, Lord Drumalbyn, may be in charge of the Bill he is not in charge of the House or the Business, which has to be settled—and a difficult enough task it is, anyway—between the usual channels, who invariably get blamed by someone. As I understood the position, it was judged mutually (though I did not take part in the discussions) that this was the best order, and particularly suited the convenience of certain other people in regard to the Fair Trading Bill. May I say to my noble friend that this is always very annoying for someone, and I am quite certain that. the Government will make a terrible mess of it and will displease everybody, as do every Government, and I think I must say that in these matters the Opposition leadership must carry some of the blame also.
I am bound to say that in view of the particular importance of the Water Bill and the much greater number of people involved, probably the number of people who are suited, if one is to approach this statistically, is greater in regard to this order than the reverse order.

§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRY
My Lords, while accepting the rebuke of my noble friend in that I spoke more than once, may I, with the permission of the House, ask a question if I may not speak again? May I ask my noble friend the Leader of the Opposition and the House to accept that I am not dealing with convenience, but are your Lordships aware that we people who take a particular interest in the consumer are very tired of being told, whichever 983 Party is in Government, of the great importance of the consumer but always finding the subject at the back of the queue, whatever the reason? We do not think that it is good enough.