HL Deb 22 January 1976 vol 367 cc642-4
Lord BEAUMONT of WHITLEY

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 how many adverse reports on recommendations for advancement to the Peerage have been made by the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee since 1960 and how many of such adverse reports have been overruled.

The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Lord Shepherd)

My Lords, advice given to successive Prime Ministers by the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee is strictly confidential, and I am afraid that it is therefore not possible for me to provide the details for which the noble Lord has asked.

Lord BEAUMONT of WHITLEY

My Lords, while appreciating the necessity for confidentiality, may I ask what recourse the Committee has if it makes an adverse recommendation which is over ruled? How can it then fulfil its proper function?

Lord SHEPHERD

My Lords, I am not aware of any recourse here—this is an advisory Committee—but if the noble Lord were to look at the terms of reference he would see the terms under which the Scrutiny Committee act. If they were to give what might be called adverse advice and the Prime Minister of the day was then to overrule it or not to accept it, the Prime Minister is required to ensure that when he makes his recommendations to the Monarch a copy of the report of the Committee is submitted with it.

Lord SHINWELL

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend what is the reason for confidentiality in a matter of this kind, particularly on the part of a Government who believe in everything being explained to the general public? Is there any assurance that the members of the Honours Scrutiny Committee, whose names are not known to us—perhaps my noble friend will enlighten us on that point—never exhibit any bias? Is there any guarantee that they are completely devoid of bias when names come before them?

Lord SHEPHERD

My Lords, if my noble friend had exercised his customary scrutiny he would be aware of the names of the members of this Committee. In the light of what he has said in regard to bias, if I say that the present members of that Committee are the noble Lord, Lord Crathorne, the noble Lord, Lord Reay, and my noble friend Lady Summerskill, I think my noble friend will acquit them of any question of bias in this matter.

Lord SHINWELL

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that I am not in the least assured by what he says? Is he aware that I know of some instances where the recommendation was made—I say this with great delicacy—even by persons associated with the Royal Family, and was rejected by the Scrutiny Committee, although the recommendation was made on two occasions? Is there some reason for this? Are we not to know why recommendations which emanate from quite responsible organisations—though I do not particularly support them—should be rejected?

Lord SHEPHERD

My Lords, my understanding is that recommendations for honours of whatever kind—but in this case political honours—do not go direct to this Committee; they go there only when it has been decided that the name should be placed upon a recommended list. I would have thought that it must be obvious to my noble friend, and I am sure to the House, that a Committee of this kind, considering the very nature of its task, could work only upon a basis of confidentiality. I believe that any other basis would be utterly unacceptable.

Lord BYERS

My Lords, for the record I think the noble Lord meant to refer to the former Leader of the Liberal Party, the noble Lord, Lord Rea, and not to the noble Lord, Lord Reay.

Lord SHEPHERD

My Lords, I beg the pardon of both noble Lords.