Lords Sitting of 7 February 1974

Preamble
The House met at three of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Chichester.

EUROPEAN SECURITY AND FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT
LORD BROCKWAY: My 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 what are the limitations to the term "freedom of movement" which the British and Western delegations at the Commissions of the European Conference of Security and Co-operation are requiring; and whether it means the unrestricted right of Communists to visit this country and of nationals of the United Kingdom to visit Eastern Europe.
THE MINISTER OF STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE): My Lords, at the first stage of the Conference in July, Ministers agreed on terms of reference for the official committees which in this case require them to prepare proposals to facilitate,
"freer movement and contacts … among persons, institutions and organisations of the participating states".
The intention is to improve the present situation, rather than confer unrestricted rights of access.
LORD BROCKWAY: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for that Answer. While many of us would want the greatest freedom of movement and ideas, does not her Answer indicate that there will inevitably be restrictions? If that is the case, cannot agreement be found between the West and the Communist countries in order to expedite the preparations for the European Conference?
BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE: My Lords, some countries
900
appear to believe that the discussion to which I have referred could lead to interference in their domestic affairs. Of course this is not the purpose of the Western proposals because ours include proposals in respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
LORD BROCKWAY: My Lords, again I thank the noble Baroness. Does not that answer emphasise the point of the question which I previously asked? Is it not very desirable, in view of the acceptance of restrictions from both sides, that agreement should be reached on this matter in order that the European Conference may not be postponed? Should not priority be given to such an agreement?
BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE: My Lords, I do not know whether the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, is referring to the fact that nationals of Communist countries need visas to enter the United Kingdom, and of course vice-versa. But our own requirements do not greatly restrict the freedom of movement of such travellers, some of whom still experience difficulty in getting permission to leave their own countries.

POSTAL DELIVERIES AND COLLECTIONS
3.8 p.m.
LORD SWAYTHLING: My 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 issue a directive to ensure that if the Post Office, in order to save fuel, reduces collections from pillar boxes to one a day, that one shall be in the afternoon, or at any rate not in the early morning.
LORD DENHAM: No, my Lords. I am informed that as in rural areas Post Office delivery and collection services are normally combined, to deliver in the morning and collect only later in the day would be no saving. The Post Office feel that to postpone deliveries to the aftrnoon would delay the mail still further.
LORD SWAYTHLING: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that Answer. Is he aware that in many country districts the pillar boxes are cleared at

901
7.15 in the morning and deliveries are made at 8 o'clock so that if an answer to a letter is needed urgently and if the answer is put into the letter box, it will not leave the box until the next day? Is he aware that printed notices put on letter boxes state that this is done to economise in fuel, when, as it seems to me, the only economy is made by the Post Office? Would not the noble Lord agree that many people have to use their cars to go to the post office if they have an urgent letter to post, and that in that way more petrol is used?
LORD DENHAM: My Lords, the Post Office examined all the possible options for making a saving in fuel. The rural service uses up to 40 per cent. of all the petrol used by the postal service whereas the rural traffic is only 10 per cent. of the total. Therefore it seemed to the Post Office that this would be the easiest way to make a saving with the least disruption for people. As regards Lord Swaythling's second supplementary question about people driving into town to post letters, I am sure that everyone is aware of the need to save petrol and will bear this in mind when deciding whether their mail is of sufficient importance to warrant such a journey.
BARONESS STOCKS: My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that in my postal district there are four collections a day, apart from the morning delivery and evening collection? Is he aware that whenever a collection occurs a large van manned by two men is used to collect the letters and then goes off to the neighbouring post boxes? Would not Her Majesty's Government admit that the Civil Service did it better?
LORD DENHAM: No, my Lords, I would not admit anything of the kind. This is a matter for the Post Office; but I am sure that the Post Office will take note of the noble Baroness's comments.
LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORD: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that while the discontinuance of the second delivery would be accepted in the rural areas as a reasonable economy, it is the loss of the second collection which makes a serious inroad into the general convenience of country dwellers? If there is to be a single collection in the rural areas is
902
it not possible for it to be later in the day, as the noble Lord, Lord Swaythling, suggests, possibly at mid-day, rather than first thing in the morning?
LORD DENHAM: My Lords, the difficulty, as I said in my original Answer, is that delivery and collection are done together with the same van. The only way it would be possible to have the collection later in the day would be to deliver later as well, and the Post Office think that would be more, and not less, inconvenient to the general public.
LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORD: My Lords, may I ask my noble friend to address his mind slightly more closely to this matter? Is he aware that in the rural areas the postal delivery takes some time and is not completed until between half past nine and ten o'clock in the morning? Is it not possible for the collection from the boxes to take place after the delivery has been completed—perhaps between ten o'clock and eleven o'clock—by the same van?
LORD DENHAM: My Lords, I am sure that the Post Office always keep in close touch with public opinion in these matters, and I am confident that they will read my noble friend's remarks with great interest.
LORD HALE: My Lords, am I expected to reply to a letter before I have received it? If it comes by the first post I have to take 24 hours to reply to it.
LORD DENHAM: My Lords, that will give the noble Lord, Lord Hale, plenty of time for thought before putting his words on paper.
LORD DAVIES OF LEEK: My Lords, is the noble Lord, Lord Denham, aware that some of us who have lived for much of our lives in country districts, whichever Government is in office, still appreciate the fact that the village post office delivers to country areas in wind, rain, thunder and storm? With the millions of letters that are delivered, too many people "bind" and "gut" about the few that go astray.
LORD DENHAM: Yes, my Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Leek, and I think it is a point that might well be remembered.
LORD NAPIER AND ETTRICK: My Lords, would not the noble Lord agree that if an urgent reply is needed, there is always the telephone or telegraph service available?
LORD DENHAM: Yes, my Lords.
LORD DOUGLASS OF CLEVELAND: My Lords, is the Minister's answer in response to public opinion on that subject in accord with his general attitude with respect to public opinion?
LORD DENHAM: My Lords, yes; I think the Post Office do take particular notice of public opinion on these matters, and public opinion is very often well observed in your Lordships House and in another place.
LORD DOUGLASS OF CLEVELAND: My Lords, may I ask as a supplementary question, is that the reason why we are having an Election?
LORD PLATT: My Lords, are Her Majesty's Government aware that in the outskirts of London, where I live, the first delivery has been so delayed that the second delivery has often arrived before the first, and that this can be most confusing?

RELIGIOUS EDUCATION COURSES
BARONESS PHILLIPS: My 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 all colleges of education offer opportunities of instruction to students wishing to specialise in religious education.
THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE (LORD SANDFORD): Not all, my Lords. Of the 152 colleges and 7 polytechnic departments of education providing teacher-training courses in England and Wales, 128 offer opportunities for specialising in religious education as a main course of study.
BARONESS PHILLIPS: My Lords, while thanking the Minister for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware that many people are disturbed by the decline in the teaching of religious education in schools, and would he press his right honourable friend to see that every college of education offers those who wish to specialise the opportunity to do so?
LORD SANDFORD: My Lords, that may be so; but there are plenty of courses for teachers who wish to specialise in this subject: indeed, some of them are badly under-subscribed. There has been a shortage of teachers in this subject, but the situation is now improving.
LORD SOMERS: My Lords, the noble Baroness asked that there should be an opportunity to specialise given to those who wish to do so. Does the noble Lord not consider it to be essential, particularly in view of the state of our country today, that everybody should have at least a basic grounding in Christian education?
LORD SANDFORD: My Lords, that has always been one of the basic tenets of our educational system. As I say, there have always been ample courses, but the problem has been that some are under-subscribed.
LORD ELTON: Is the noble Lord the Minister aware that religious education is commonly taught as a supplementary subject by many teachers, and if facilities are not available for them to be instructed in this subject in their colleges of education, before they undertake their teaching duties, their teaching of this particular subject is often badly done? Would the noble Lord not agree that this is a very bad thing for the nation, as well as for education?
LORD SANDFORD: Yes, my Lords, but I think my remarks indicated that there are ample courses available.
LORD HAWKE: My Lords, if there were to be a shortage of teachers in these establishments, would my noble friend remember that there are plenty of Bishops retiring in the prime of life, and that they might well act as teachers?

DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT
3.16 p.m.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (LORD WINDLESHAM): My Lords, in view of the announcement made earlier to-day from No. 10 Downing Street, I shall not move the Business Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
With the leave of the House, I should like to inform your Lordships that the Prime Minister has asked Her Majesty The Queen by telegram to New Zealand to proclaim an early Dissolution of Parliament. She has been pleased to comply with this request. The Prime Minister advised Her Majesty that it is desirable in the present situation that the period between the decision to call the Election and polling day should be as short as possible. Parliament will therefore be prorogued to-morrow, Friday, February 8, and dissolved later the same day. Polling will be on Thursday, February 28. The Dissolution Proclamation will declare Wednesday, March 6, as the date for which the new Parliament will be summoned. The new Parliament will be opened on Tuesday, March 12.
With the leave of the House, my noble friend the Government Chief Whip will now make a statement about the rearrangement of Business.

BUSINESS REARRANGEMENT
3.18 p.m.
EARL ST. ALDWYN: My Lords, following the announcement just made by my noble friend, perhaps I might inform your Lordships about the rearrangement of business between now and Prorogation to-morrow. The following proposals have been discussed through the usual channels in both Houses, and I hope they will be acceptable to your Lordships.
The Local Government Bill already before your Lordships' House is urgent, and in the circumstances it is hoped that the Committee stage can be taken formally to-day. This would enable the Bill to complete its remaining stages to-morrow and to receive the Royal Assent. It is also proposed to take to-morrow the remaining stages of the Charlwood and Horley Bill and the Statutory Corporations (Financial Provisions) Bill, both of
906
which will be advanced from the dates on which they are now down on the Order Paper. The Biological Weapons Bill, which is to have its Committee stage to-day, will receive its Third Reading to-morrow, and I hope that your Lordships will agree to the Ancillary Dental Workers Regulations being taken as well.
In addition to these items already before the House, it is anticipated that your Lordships will be asked to consider and to take through all their stages the Pensions (Increase) Bill, the Consolidated Fund (Appropriation) Bill and the Representation of the People Bill, if these Bills complete all their stages in another place to-day. I would also propose that Motions respecting the continuation of the State of Emergency should be considered by your Lordships. Finally, the Government will be tabling to-night, for consideration to-morrow, a Motion clarifying the position of the Members of the European Parliament during the Dissolution. The effect of this will be to ensure that British interests at the European Parliament may be represented until such time as a new Parliament designates new delegates to the European Parliament. It will therefore be necessary to ask the House to meet at eleven o'clock to-morrow morning to complete this urgent business. At a convenient moment after this, the Royal Commission giving the Royal Assent to the Bills and Proroguing Parliament will take place.
3.20 p.m.
LORD SHACKLETON: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Earl for making what is a rather complex Statement. No doubt some noble Lords will be comforted by the fact that the European Parliament will be looking after our affairs during a moment of deep national crisis. Last night many of us said rather clearly what we thought regarding Government policy. But it is not the custom of your Lordships' House to start fighting an Election in this House; it is a matter in which others are more concerned. Although we would not wish now to delay an Election with the great hope of a new Government, I should like to ask a few questions regarding business.
It is unfortunate that the Local Government Bill has to be taken through all its stages. I understand that not only are there important Amendments from

907
our side, but possibly there are even more important Amendments from the Government side. On the other hand, all those who have been concerned with this Bill have been consulted and agree that it is a matter of such urgency from the standpoint of the local authorities—not to mention the ratepayers—that the Bill should go through. May I ask whether the Leader of the House will give an undertaking—I appreciate that he cannot bind a future Government—that if, by some mischance, the present Government are still in office they will be prepared to consider providing an opportunity, through fresh legislation if necessary, to deal with some of the important matters about which noble Lords on both sides of the House are concerned? It is rather unsatisfactory that the Committee stage of this Bill should go through "on the nod". But we accept, as do my friends in another place, the necessity of proceeding accordingly.
Looking at the other items, there seems to be no difficulty. Clearly the Pensions Increase Bill, which is the outcome of Whitley Council discussions, is important and no doubt the Leader of the House, in his capacity as Minister in charge of the Civil Service, will be looking after this. Will the Proclamation on the Emergency be made to-day and the Orders come before us to-morrow? It has been our custom to facilitate such Orders, although if the House and Parliament had continued sitting it is likely that we should have wished to debate this matter and raise criticisms, some of which we made yesterday.
LORD GLADWYN: My Lords, from these Benches I should like to associate myself with what the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, said. We are entirely happy with the proposed business for to-day and to-morrow.
LORD WIGG: My Lords, I wonder whether it is permissible for me to thank the Leader of the House, not only on my own behalf but, I am sure, on behalf of all Members of your Lordships' House, for the courtesy and kindness with which he has discharged his duties during the short time that he has held his present office. May I express the earnest hope to him that he will have a long holiday
908
on the day following Polling Day and will shortly afterwards find a congenial and well-paid occupation.
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, I appreciate very much the remarks made by the noble Lord, Lord Wigg. I shall be working hard in the next few weeks to deprive him of that pleasure. The Government Chief Whip and I are extremely grateful to the Leaders of the Labour Party and Liberal Party in this House for the way they have made possible this drastic reorganisation of business. It is normally the tradition that Government and Opposition try to get together when an announcement is made to see what essential legislation should be enabled to go through. Inevitably this means that the normal Parliamentary procedures are foreshortened. The principal casualty in this instance is the Local Government Bill, which your Lordships were due to consider in Committee this afternoon. If what has been discussed through the usual channels proves acceptable to your Lordships, it means that there will in effect be no Committee stage, Report stage or Third Reading in this House.
LORD SHACKLETON: My Lords, as I understand it, there has to be a Committee stage; we are already committed to that. I understand that noble Lords will just say, "Not moved". Is that correct?
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, I will explain the procedure and attempt to guide the House when the time comes. What the noble Lord has said is correct. I was saying that there will be no effective Committee procedure; there will be no opportunity for noble Lords to amend the Bill or indeed for the Government to make amendments to the Bill. I can willingly give the noble Lord the assurance for which he has asked. If there are points which noble Lords feel strongly about and which they had intended to raise in Committee, my noble friend Baroness Young will be only too ready to meet them as early as possible, either later this week or early next week if that is what they wish, in order to discuss their Amendments to find out the strength of feeling behind them.
The Secretary of State for the Environment is already considering the Amendments which were proposed by the Government to this Bill. I have discussed

909
this with him personally and I can assure noble Lords that his mind is quite open. If he believes it to be necessary in a new Parliament—if we are fortunate enough to be the Government at that time—he will be ready to consider fresh legislation. As to the State of Emergency, what the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, said is correct. I will be delivering to your Lordships the Queen's Message, the Proclamation on the State of Emergency, later this afternoon, together with a Statement made by the Home Secretary in another place that accompanies it. To-morrow, in accordance with the usual practice, we will have the Motions and the Regulations before the House. I am most grateful to the House for the way in which these proposals to reorganise our business have been met.
LORD BLYTON: My Lords, can the noble Lord say when he reintroduces the Emergency Regulations to-morrow whether the Government are going to abolish the three-day week for the printing trade? In the three weeks before the Election a three-day week for the printing trade will make it impossible for candidates to get the necessary propaganda published.
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, perhaps this is a point we can discuss when we have the Regulations before us to-morrow.
LORD HALE: My Lords, can the noble Lord say whether the issue of a Proclamation for the new Parliament is to be deemed to have taken place before the Prorogation, or whether it is going to take place after the Prorogation, and whether Her Most Gracious Majesty was given adequate information to consult on this difficult constitutional position with her advisers in the Antipodes?
LORD GARDINER: My Lords, having regard to the increasing difficulties which firms, societies and individuals are having in getting anything from their printers, are the Lord Chancellor's Office and the returning officers in a position to conduct an Election?
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD HAILSHAM OF SAINT MARYLERONE): My Lords, regarding the question about the Lord Chancellor's Office, I made inquiries about the necessary printing, and I have some reason to think that everything is
910
in order, although I am not sure that I have Ministerial responsibility for it. I think there is a statutory responsibility upon the Clerk to the Crown. I made inquiries some days ago as to the state of readiness and I believe that it is all right.
LORD HALE: My Lords, could the noble Lord the Leader of the House answer my question?
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, the procedures which have been followed by the Prime Minister in announcing an Election follow closely established precedent. Precedents have been looked into and the noble Lord can be sure that Her Majesty's constitutional position was properly taken into account. As I have said, Parliament will be Prorogued to-morrow. It is proposed that after we have completed our Business there shall be a period of adjournment during pleasure, after which Prorogation will take place. The Proclamation about which we were speaking just now relates to the State of Emergency and not to the Prorogation of Parliament.
LORD GEORGE-BROWN: My Lords, may I ask the Minister, since so many of us are more concerned with the state of the nation than we are with the state of the Parties, whether he is aware that Mr. Gormley has said that he thinks the strike of the miners should be postponed? He has declared it to be his personal opinion and he has given a lead. May I therefore ask the Minister whether the Government have made any response to this?
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, I understand that the Prime Minister has been in touch with Mr. Gormley to-day informing him of his decision to ask the Queen for a Dissolution of Parliament and a General Election, and asking the Executive Committee of the National Union of Mineworkers, in the national interest, very seriously to consider suspending the national coal strike during the period of the Election campaign. If I am to gather from what the noble Lord, Lord George-Brown, has said that Mr. Gormley has responded favourably to that request then I regard it as good news indeed.
LORD GEORGE-BROWN: No, my Lords, it is not favourably to them. May

911
I ask, is not that the problem? Whenever the mineworkers, or anybody else, move, the present Government claim it is as a response to them. Could they not respond to what Mr. Gormley has said, and could they not—and I am still asking—say to Mr. Gormley, "Is it five pennies or ten pennies? Where could we settle?" I am still asking the noble Lord: does he realise that, once a division of the country is started upon, neither he nor I knows where it will end? Would he not—and I am still asking interrogatively—be wiser to find out where he could settle to-night?
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, with the greatest possible respect to the noble Lord, Lord George-Brown, we are on a Business Statement. We are talking about the rearrangement of Business before this House to-day—and the Government have proposed certain changes—and to-morrow. The noble Lord the Leader of this Opposition said, in his opening remarks, very rightly and very wisely, that it is not the custom of this House to start fighting an Election campaign in this House on an occasion of this kind. We had a full debate yesterday, and it really would be appropriate to leave this issue and not to pursue the rights and wrongs of the miners' dispute in discussing a Business Statement in the House of Lords when an Election has just been announced.
SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS: Hear, hear!
LORD BLYTON: My Lords, as one who is closely connected with the miners' union would the House suffer with me when I say that if Joe Gormley has said this then I heartilly agree with him. But it is his private opinion, and this decision must be made by the Executive Committee and not by the President himself. May I go further, and say that there is an opinion held that if the strike is postponed for the Election we may be charged with fighting a political rather than a wages issue?
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, I must repeat again that I do not see the connection between the dispute with the National Union of Mineworkers and the Business of the House.
LORD GEORGE-BROWN: Don't be so silly!
LORD WINDLESHAM: I ask the noble Lord, Lord George-Brown, to respect the traditions of this House.
SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS: Hear, hear!
LORD HALE: My Lords, may I say that the Leader of the House may have misunderstood me and I therefore desire to correct that. I knew the Proclamation he referred to was the Proclamation of Emergency and I wondered why he said that they were going to make it if they had not yet made up their mind whether or not the Emergency was to be suspended. The Proclamation I specifically referred to was the Proclamation for the summoning of a new Parliament which, according to the Representation of of the People Act, 1949, must be made at least 17 clear days, excluding Sundays and Bank Holidays, before Polling Day. Therefore, rather reluctantly, I was almost being helpful to the Government in suggesting that it might be as well to know whether the rather unusual course was taken of having issued a Proclamation summoning the new Parliament now, or whether that did not have to wait until after the Prorogation?
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, my understanding is that it does have to wait until after the Prorogation, as the noble Lord says.
LORD GEORGE-BROWN: My Lords, since the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, rebuked me, may I just say to him that offending the traditions of this House is not what people outside this House are bothering about. Would he not ask his senior colleagues to pick up what is quite clearly an olive branch? If I offend the traditions of this House by pushing it, then I offend the traditions of this House. Mr. Gormley is trying exceedingly hard not to get a confrontation. Are Ministers so determined to get it that they will argue with me about the traditions of this House? Why do not Ministers—and I ask the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, so experienced, such an industrialist, why does not he go round to Mr. Gormley and say, "Brother, can we not settle this before we get into awful bloody trouble"?
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, I was not talking about people outside this House; I was talking to Peers inside this House.
LORD GEORGE-BROWN: Oh well! … Who cares?

BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS BILL
EARL COWLEY: My Lords, speaking on behalf of my noble friend Lord Colville of Culross, I understand that no Amendments have been set down to this Bill and that no noble Lord has indicated a wish to move a manuscript Amendment or to speak in Committee. Therefore, unless any noble Lord objects, I beg to move, pursuant to Standing Order No. 45(2), that the Order of Commitment be discharged.
Moved, That the Order of Commitment be discharged.—(Earl Cowley.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT BILL
3.38 p.m.
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend Lady Young, I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill. I think that this is the appropriate moment to give the House a very brief explanation of why this Bill is urgently needed and why we have asked the other Parties and other Peers who have taken an interest in it and put down Amendments to move them formally.
As noble Lords will know, the Local Government Bill makes certain changes in the grant system whereby the Exchequer aids local government revenue. This system, the rate support grant, provides the overwhelming bulk of Government aid to local authorities and a changed system of distribution as from the beginning of April this year was made necessary by local government reorganisation. An important part of the Bill is the power to pay variable domestic relief to different local authorities. This power does not exist under existing legislation. It is a necessary power to ease the excessive rate burdens which would otherwise fall on domestic ratepayers in particular parts of the country as a result of the changes stemming from reorganisation. The rate support grant Order which would give effect to these provisions cannot be made until this Bill has received the Royal Assent. But equally, until they know the grant they will receive, local authorities cannot make their rates, which must be operative as from April.
914
The Government have made a rate support grant settlement with the local authorities and have promised them, in the White Paper published at the end of last month, how much grant they will receive. It is on that basis that the local authorities are now drawing up their budgets. Unless the Local Government Bill is passed it will be impossible for the local authorities to draw up those budgets and to be paid Government grants as promised to them in April and succeeding months. It is for these reasons, my Lords, that we believe it is in the public interest to speed this Bill towards the Statute Book before the end of this Parliament.
The noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, asked about the procedural implications of the Committee stage upon which we are now embarking. It is not possible to discharge the Order of Commitment, which in many ways perhaps would be the simplest and most straightforward thing to do. We did it just now with the Biological Weapons Bill. It cannot be done in this instance, however, because no notice has been given of the intention to move the discharge; and under our Rules of Order the Order of Commitment can be discharged only if no Amendment has been set down. Of course, as your Lordships know, a number of Amendments, 40 or so, have been put down for to-day.
For these two reasons I have been advised by the Table that it is not open to us to discharge the Order of Commitment. This is the procedure governed by Standing Order No. 45. However, I have been able to consult the Lord Chairman of Committees, who will be taking the Chair at the Committee stage, and I understand that he hopes to take us fairly quickly and formally through the Bill if it is apparent that noble Lords who have Amendments down on the Marshalled List are prepared not to move them. I beg to move.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Windlesham.)
3.42 p.m.
LORD GARNSWORTHY: My Lords, we appreciate what the Leader of the House has had to say on this matter. May I say that when my noble Leader, Lord Shackleton, spoke just now he was reflecting the views of my colleagues and

915
myself on this side who had tabled Amendments. We appreciate the urgency of the situation. It is only because of that that we are agreeable to the course suggested. May I say that I think it most regrettable that this matter has been left to this late stage. Local government has been placed in a position of considerable embarrassment. We on this side will certainly do all we can to avoid creating further difficulties for them.
VISCOUNT RIDLEY: My Lords, as one who has put his name to some of these Amendments, I would indeed support the noble Lord the Leader of the House, in the statement he has made. I would just ask him whether it is possible, Election or not, for the calculations of the domestic rate relief to be speeded up. The circular which was issued on February 4 is of unbelievable complexity, so much so that it has baffled all the financial brains in local government; they cannot work out what it means. They are told that it will be some days, or maybe weeks, before they will get the details. Without in any way wishing to impede the progress of this Bill, may I make a plea that the detailed calculations are issued to the local authorities as soon as possible.
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, I am grateful for what both noble Lords have said. In reply to the noble Viscount, Lord Ridley, I am sure my noble friend Lady Young would wish to do everything she can to expedite the circular to which the noble Viscount has referred. I would repeat what I said earlier, and I hope the noble Viscount, Lord Ridley, and any other noble Lords who have Amendments down, will take the opportunity of meeting with the noble Baroness, so that it is possible for the Minister and the Peers who have an interest in this subject to sit down and have a look at the Amendments, and to see whether fresh legislation may be necessary in the new Parliament.
LORD RHODES: My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether a local authority that was able to prove injustice about the amount of rate grant would have to wait twelve months before any amendment could be made?
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, I understand that this Bill does not deal
916
with the settlement: it is the legislative framework.
VISCOUNT AMORY: My Lords, may I say that the suggestion made by my noble friend, that Lady Young should be good enough to see some of those who have Amendments down, might be extremely useful. Some of the Amendments were of a probing nature. I think the information could probably be obtained in the course of such a discussion and it seems to me that we should take advantage of the opportunity offered.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly.
[The EARL OF LISTOWEL in the Chair.]
Clauses and Schedules agreed to.
House resumed.
Bill reported, without amendment.
BARONESS YOUNG: My Lords, I beg to move that this Report be now received.
Moved, That the Report be now received.—(Baroness Young.)
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, on the Motion, That the Report be now received, may I say that I think the House would wish to record its gratitude to the noble Earl the Chairman of Committees for moving with such tremendous speed and accuracy through a very complicated exercise. I am sure he has set some kind of record. Whether it is one that he would ever wish to rival again, I very much doubt; but our thanks are due to him.
3.53 p.m.
LORD LEATHERLAND: My Lords, I wish to protest against the ridiculous charade which we have just experienced. It is an example of the contemptuous treatment by this Government of the local authorities of this country. The Government deliberately delayed the introduction of this very important Bill until what they knew were to be the last few days of this Parliament. They knew that there were many of us on both sides of the House who were anxious to move Amendments to the proposals in the Bill. They have denied us that opportunity. We hear from the newspapers and other media that in these days Parliament is more and more being held in contempt.

917
The pantomime performance of this afternoon will strengthen the beliefs of those people who hold Parliament in that contempt. For that I am sorry.
VISCOUNT AMORY: My Lords, I do not recall an occasion when I have wished, as I do at this minute, to dissociate myself so strongly from what the noble Lord, Lord Leatherland, has said, because I can find no evidence whatever to justify his remark that the Government have deliberately delayed this Bill for the reason he mentioned. We all regret that there has not been time for the Committee stage; and I agree with him on that. But I really must dissociate myself most strongly from what he implied at the beginning of his remarks.
VISCOUNT RIDLEY: My Lords, may I just add that I think local government generally will be very glad indeed to have this Bill passed so quickly.
LORD GARNSWORTHY: My Lords, I had not intended to say any more, but I gather that the noble Lord the Leader of the House was asking us to join with him in expressing thanks to the Lord Chairman of Committees. I am quite sure that everybody in the Chamber does that because his performance was extremely impressive. May I say with regard to the points that have been raised, particularly those of my noble friend behind me, that while I cannot commit the next Government to anything (because I probably shall be one of the most humble Members of your Lordships' House) it would be my very great wish that if my colleagues form that Government, as I hope they will, they will return to this question of local government; and particularly to finance, because the present position is extremely unsatisfactory, as are a number of other matters. May I say, further to that, that I have been assured, while discussions have been going on throughout the afternoon, by what was said to me beforehand by my noble friend our Chief Whip on this side, Lady Llewelyn-Davies of Hastoe, that the undertaking given is one that we can accept; that, should we be unfortunate and lose the Election, the Government will Rive us the opportunity of returning to this question, when I
918
hope we shall have a full opportunity of discussing the issues referred to.
BARONESS YOUNG: My Lords, may I say to the noble Lord, Lord Leatherland, that no discourtesy to the House has been intended over this matter. May I also give my assurance to the Members of your Lordships' House who had Amendments down and would like to discuss them with me, that I shall be very happy to do so. Of course, I say that to my noble friends also, and thank them for their remarks.
On Question, Report received.

STATE OF EMERGENCY: MESSAGE FROM THE COUNSELLORS OF STATE
3.57 p.m.
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, I have the honour to present a Message from the Counsellors of State, on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen, signed by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother and Her Royal Highness Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon.
The Message is as follows:
"The Emergency Powers Act 1920, as amended by the Emergency Powers Act 1964, having enacted that if it appears to Her Majesty that there have occurred or are about to occur events of such a nature as to be calculated, by interfering with the supply and distribution of food, water, fuel or light, or with the means of locomotion, to deprive the community, or any substantial portion of the community, of the essentials of life, Her Majesty may, by Proclamation, declare that a state of emergency exists:
"And Her Majesty having on the ninth day of January, 1974, made, in pursuance thereof, a Proclamation declaring that the industrial disputes affecting persons employed in the coal mines and on the railways and the reduction of oil supplies reaching Great Britain did, in Her opinion, constitute a state of emergency within the meaning of the said Act of 1920 as so amended, which Proclamation does not remain in force for more than one month:
"We, Counsellors of State, to whom have been delegated certain Royal

919
Functions as specified in Letters Patent dated the twenty-fourth day of January, 1974, being of the opinion that the continuance of the said industrial disputes and the continued reduction in those oil supplies constitute a state of emergency within the meaning of the said Act of 1920 as so amended, have, in pursuance thereof, made on Her Majesty's behalf a Proclamation dated the seventh day of February, 1974, declaring that a state of emergency exists."

STATE OF EMERGENCY
LORD WINDLESHAM: My Lords, with the leave of the House I will repeat a Statement made in another place by my right honourable friend the Home Secretary in connection with the Proclamation which I have just read to your Lordships. The Statement is as follows:
"Under the provisions of the Emergency Powers Act 1920 the Proclamation made on January 9 will expire at midnight to-morrow, together with the Regulations made in pursuance of that Proclamation. Since there has been no resolution of the disputes affecting the coal mines and the railways and there is still a short-fall in our oil supplies, the Government consider that it is necessary for the State of Emergency to be continued. A further Proclamation and Emergency Regulations have therefore been made by the Counsellors of State acting on Her Majesty's behalf during Her absence from the United Kingdom. The Regulations—the Emergency (No. 2) Regulations 1974—are in substance the same as those laid before Parliament on 9th January and will come into force at midnight to-morrow. They will be laid before Parliament later to-day and copies will be available to Members in the Vote Office as soon as possible.
"As always, use of the emergency powers will be limited to measures necessary in the public interest."