HL Deb 22 November 1976 vol 377 cc1726-7

82 Page 28, line 33, after "Board" insert "for the taking of any final decision shall be 7 (including deputies)".

The Commons disagreed to this Amendment for the following Reason:

83 Because it is undesirable to fix the Board's quorum by statute.

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth not insist on their Amendment No. 82, to which the Commons have disagreed for the Reason numbered 83.

Moved, That this House doth not insist on the said Amendment, to which the Commons have disagreed for the Reason numbered 83.—(Lord Wells-Pestell.)

Lord SANDYS

My Lords, the quorum and the setting of the right numbers concerned us very much at all stages of this Bill. I should like to refer to the speech made by the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell, at the Report stage of the Bill, because I think he made the case for us. He had to rely on an assumption. We were dealing, of course, with the question of deputies and the broad issue of how the Board should reach its decisions and manage its affairs, and he said this, We should assume—I know that is a dangerous word to use in your Lordships' House—and I think it would be made quite clear, that the chairman of the Board would, if a decision of some importance had to be made, postpone that decision for a few days until that other member could attend so that there would be a full attendance of the chairman and the four members of the Board."—[Official Report, 17/11/76; col. 1291.] Here is a situation in which the noble Lord, Lord Wells-Pestell, is casting his mind into the future. He casts it with an assumption. He is so right here in suggesting it is dangerous, because this danger could well occur. Further, the danger would be overcome if the noble Lord had advised his right honourable friend to adopt this Amendment, and the Government had thought fit to make further arrangements whereby no important decisions were reached unless a sufficient number of people were present.

The situation is acknowledged by the Government—indeed, in the terms which I have quoted—that there is a doubt, a dubiety, a hesitation, a possibility, that important matters should be decided without a sufficient number of people and without the backing of a statutory number within the quorum. I think this is an omission from the Bill.