HL Deb 16 November 1976 vol 377 cc1115-8

2.49 p.m.

Lord SHINWELL

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 functions of the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee; whether they have authority to recommend or reject any nomination for membership of the House of Lords; and what are the qualifications considered for such membership.

The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Lord Peart)

My Lords the function of the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee is to report to the Prime Minister whether the persons whose names he submits to them are fit and proper persons to be recommended for appointment to any dignity or honour on account of political services. Their function is one of scrutiny and scrutiny only—to report if the past history or general character of a person render him unsuitable to be recommended. The Committee have no duties of initiation or recommendation, nor are they asked to adjudicate on the nature of the honour submitted, whether it be for Life Peerage or for any other appointment, The criteria for the selection of Life Peers are not, therefore, a matter for the Committee. They are for the Prime Minister to decide.

Lord SHINWELL

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for that reply. In the matter of the rejection, the non-acceptance of nomination, can he say what criteria would justify action of that kind? At the same time, can my noble friend also say whether, in a matter of qualifications, the nominees are ever asked if they propose to attend your Lordships' House and take part in the normal activities?

Lord PEART

My Lords, if the Committee reports against the name put forward to them, I am being asked whether that is decisive against the appointment being made. I would say, not necessarily. I cannot reveal the details of any particular case. On the other matter that my noble friend Lord Shinwell raised, I have great sympathy with him, because I know he is an assiduous attender of this House, and is an example to many younger Peers. I hope I shall live up to his reputation. All I would say is that this is really a matter for the Prime Minister; there are a large number of considerations in mind in making the selection.

Lord SHINWELL

My Lords, setting aside the somewhat belated congratulations on my activities, may I repeat the question about qualifications. We want to know whether, when a nominee is suggested to the Scrutiny Committee, they are asked the question, "Have you got the time to attend their Lordships' House or do you merely accept the Peerage and leave it at that?"

Lord PEART

My Lords, I am afraid I cannot say what questions are asked in the Scrutiny Committee. I understand the noble Lord's concern about having Peers attend the House of Lords and I think he is right to press this; I make no complaint. But there are other factors apart from attendance here in this Chamber.

Lord BYERS

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether it is a fact that a Life Peerage is regarded as a political honour which has to go to the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee? I have always assumed, and so has my Party, that it is a political appointment to attend this House and to take part in the discussions.

Lord PEART

My Lords, I think the noble Lord, Lord Byers, is quite right. I am new to this; probably he is more expert about it than I am. But I think he is right.

Lord BYERS

My Lords, if I may ask the noble Lord one further question, is it not a fact that a Life Peerage is an appointment, whereas, for example, a Privy Counsellorship is regarded, oddly enough, as a political honour and has to go to the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee?

Lord PEART

Well, my Lords, I understand that.

Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTON

My Lords, can the noble Lord confirm or deny the rumour that the Committee were on holiday when the last list was presented?

Lord SEGAL

My Lords, would not this somewhat thorny question be a little clarified if my noble friend would venture—and I would fully understand it if he is reluctant—to give some of the disqualifications rather than the qualifications?

Lord PEART

My Lords, I think that would be inappropriate.

Lord SHINWELL

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that I am far from indulging in criticism of those who are unable to attend, for business or other reasons? There is no criticism in my Question so far as that is concerned. But would it not be in the public interest, if I can use that somewhat ragged cliché if there was less secrecy about this matter, and no mystification?

Lord PEART

My Lords, I think my noble friend must understand that there has to be some secrecy about this matter. We are talking here about confidential matters which I cannot reveal. But I am glad that he has said what he has; there are noble Lords who have high business appointments and are not able to attend, but they are very fine Peers.

Lord HARMAR-NICHOLLS

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that many people who follow the working of our Constitution may be disturbed at the form of questioning to which he has just been subjected? One would have thought that a Life Peerage or any other honour of that kind was partly an honour and partly given in anticipation of the part that person could play in the interests of the country in the future. I would have thought that the recipient of such an honour ought himself to judge the occasions when he could make a contribution to the country. To make regular attendance an essential requirement would, I think, cut across the true value of this particular honour.

Lord PEART

My Lords, I do not think that the noble Lord disagrees with what my noble friend said in his supplementary Question.

Lord WADE

My Lords, could we have one point clarified, although I think the noble Lord has referred to it. Is it not correct that the creation of Life Peers is not the concern of the Scrutiny Committee?

Lord PEART

My Lords, I agree that the Scrutiny Committee cannot create Life Peers; I have stated that.

Lord HAWKE

My Lords, is the noble Lord the Leader of the House aware that we on this side of the House would greatly welcome his mobilising his full voting strength of 150 and giving our Whips the fright of their lives?

Lord PEART

And me, too, my Lords.