§ 2.48 p.m.
§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will define the terms "public interest" and "national interest"; and explain any differences arising in so far as nationalised industries are concerned.
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, I regret that I cannot answer this Question in abstract. I will try to clarify the use of these terms by Government spokesmen in any particular case.
§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRYMy Lords, can the Minister get legal advice on this matter? Is he aware that in most evidence published by the nationalised industries the terms "public interest" and "national interest" seem to occur and seem to mean the same? It would be helpful if we could have an answer to my Question. Secondly, can he tell the House whether it is correct that these terms have never been interpreted by the courts, and that therefore nobody can take up any dogmatic position on them?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, I think that the noble Baroness is correct in the second part of her question. I do not think these terms have been challenged in the courts. If she has in mind our recent discussions on the question of the West London Air Terminal, I can say that we took legal advice as to the implications of Section 40 of the Civil Aviation Act 1971, and we were advised that in that instance it did not give the Secretary of State power to intervene.
§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRYMy Lords, is the Minister aware that I was really asking about the wider issue, although that question was part of it? Is the Minister also aware that I am anxious to know whether these two terms mean the same or something different, because they seem to occur at odd intervals in 558 evidence that is published with no difference between them?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, as the noble Baroness is well aware, this is a matter for the courts to interpret. I have some personal ideas about a slight difference between the words "national" and public", and I think we can discuss this matter outside.
§ LORD SHINWELLMy Lords, do I understand the noble Lord's definition to be that the question of what is the public interest is a matter left to the judgment and discretion of the Minister? Is that the position? Is he aware that this constitutional issue was clarified during the time of the Attlee Government of 1945 to 1951, and that it was made perfectly clear that it was not entirely a matter for the judgment and discretion of the Minister, but that when a decision had been reached, either in your Lordships' House or in the other place, on an important issue concerning the public interest, the nationalised Board responsible, whichever one it was, had to take account of it?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, the issue raised by the noble Baroness, I understand, is whether there is any difference in the Statutes between the terms "national interest" and "public interest". This is the constitutional issue that she has raised, and my answer is that this would be a matter for interpretation by the courts if it was challenged.
§ BARONESS GAITSKELLMy Lords, is it not true to say that these words are used in an absolutely arbitrary way, cannot be defined and usually simply point to a difference of political opinion?
§ LORD ABERDARENo, my Lords, I do not think they are used in an arbitrary way in the Statutes. It may be that individual speakers use them in an arbitrary way, because we are all apt to use different words fairly freely.
§ VISCOUNT MASSEREENE AND FERRARDMy Lords, would not my noble friend agree that in practice" public interest" and "national interest" frequently mean two completely different things and sets of values?
§ LORD ABERDAREThat is perfectly true, my Lords. Very often they mean the same thing, but there are certain instances where they mean different things.
§ LORD AIREDALEMy Lords, do not the natural meanings of the words convey that the "national interest" is the interest of this nation among the nations of the world and the "public interest" is the interest of the members of the public within this nation?
§ LORD ABERDARENo, my Lords; I would not even go so far as to say that. I think that "national" is a more embracing term; but "public" can have a more limited meaning than the noble Lord has given it.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord—and I agree that there is a difference between the two—whether he would refer this question to the noble Lord, Lord Conesford, and ask him to give us an explanation?
§ LORD ABERDAREI can think of nobody better qualified, my Lords.
§ LORD HALEMy Lords, is the noble Lord not aware that if he refers to the case of Nordenfeldt v. Maxim Nordenfeldt and to the judgment of Baron Herschel he will certainly find a considerable and able dissection on what is "the public interest"?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Lord.