HL Deb 08 May 1973 vol 342 cc251-3

2.43 p.m.

LORD BARNBY

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they recognise the possible undesirable consequences of Parliamentary Committees being set up to investigate the internal affairs of foreign countries; and whether in particular they appreciate the damage to British trade which may be caused by the current investigation by such a Committee into wage rates in the South African Republic.

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, I can only speak for this House, but I understand that the Parliamentary Committee of another place has not yet decided precisely how it intends to carry out its task.

LORD BARNBY

My Lords, would not the noble Baroness agree that it seems regrettable that a precedent like this—to interfere in the internal affairs of another country—should appear to be established, and that a considerable amount of the time of people in this country will be taken up by the procedure which is referred to and to which attention is being drawn? Would she not also agree that technologically educated productivity is what is really desired in South Africa, and that the danger of too rapidly extending this might well be to harm the Bantu workers because thereby unemployment will be increased, particularly so in an area where there is a mixture of sustenance and cash economy.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, before the noble Baroness answers that supplementary question, may I ask the noble Earl the Leader of the House whether it is customary for us to ask Questions in this place about the proceedings in another place? This Question would not be admissible in another place, and it seems to me that we shall get into the gravest trouble if we attempt to pursue matters which concern the procedure of another place who are them- selves entirely sovereign in what they wish to do in the matter of Parliamentary Committees. May I ask the noble Earl whether he would sense the feeling of the House that we do not pursue this matter further.

THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (EARL JELLICOE)

My Lords, I think that there is a phrase in Erskine May which runs as follows: that Questions which criticise the decisions of either House of Parliament are inadmissible. I think that I would agree with the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition—and I have taken advice on this—that this subject would not be open to questioning in another place. I think also that in the interests of good relations between the two Houses, and in view of the quotation from Erskine May, we should be careful in pursuing a matter of this sort here, and especially careful not to cast reflections on what a Committee of another place has decided to look at, whether they are right or wrong in their decision. I would suggest to my noble friend, with all respect, that we should tread very carefully on this particular ground.

LORD BARNBY

My Lords, of course I defer in advance to the ruling of my noble Leader. But would he not agree with me that my Question refers to interference in the affairs of other countries, a matter which is frequently raised by Questions in this House—regrettably in my opinion—and is the case in respect of this Question which I have put down? Surely no infringement on the prerogative of another place is involved in the Question which I have asked about conditions in South Africa.

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I am not certain whether that question was addressed to me or to my noble friend Lady Tweedsmuir. I was not suggesting to my noble friend Lord Barnby that he was in any way out of order at the moment, but I was suggesting that this is very delicate ground on which it would be right for all of us to tread very carefully. I would suggest to noble Lords on both sides of the House that it would be better not to pursue this line of questioning too far, if it were thought to be implying criticism of the procedure and proceedings of another place.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, may I support the noble Earl on that point. First of all, would he agree that the burden of this Question is not what goes on in Africa but is basically the action of a Committee of another place? And whether it is in order or out of order, which is always an arguable point in our House, is it not contrary to the practice and the manners of our House that we should do this.

LORD BYERS

My Lords, will noble Lords allow me to support that observation? The Question refers specially to current investigation by such a Committee. Surely we are on very dangerous ground in respect of the relationship between the two Houses if this type of implied or explicit criticism is contained in Questions on our Order Paper.

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I am grateful to all noble Lords for their support. I am grateful to my noble friend for the action which I suspect he is about to take in not pursuing this line of questioning.