HL Deb 15 February 1977 vol 379 cc1400-2

3.2 p.m.

Lord ORR-EWING

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 the Leader of the House when the House will have its first opportunity in the present Session of discussing the Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Bill, following its references to the Examiners on 8th December.

Lord PEART

My Lords, on Second Reading.

Lord ORR-EWING

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that Government Ministers take every opportunity to pretend that it is the House of Lords which is delaying this Bill? Is it not a fact that the Bill was first presented to the House of Commons on 13th April 1975 and in the 22 months which have elapsed since that date the debate in the House of Lords has taken only 12 days? Will the Government therefore take this opportunity of setting the record straight and making it clear that it is not the House of Lords which is delaying the Bill?

Lord PEART

My Lords, the noble Lord knows very well that the Bill was submitted for examination, and that examination is still going on. I do not want to get involved in political arguments, but I think the attitude of some noble Lords in opposing all the Bill helped to delay matters.

Lord BYERS

My Lords, was it not a fact that the Government could have had nine-tenths of this Bill by dropping their proposals, even though only temporarily, to nationalise ship repairing; and is it not a fact that the House of Lords as a House had nothing to do with sending the Bill to the Examiners?

Lord PEART

I know, my Lords, and I am satisfied that it should be examined, but we must await their report.

Lord CAMPBELL of CROY

My Lords, does not the noble Lord agree that the time since November has been occupied in the accepted procedures which are there to protect the rights of the citizen without any Member of this House yet having taken any part in the proceedings?

Lord PEART

My Lords, I am sure noble Lords will agree that after the Bill had been declared prima facie hybrid by the Clerks in another place, it was quite proper that it should be referred to the Examiners in this House. I have answered the Question: we must await the report and then we shall have a Second Reading.

Lord HAILSHAM of SAINT MARY-LEBONE

My Lords, has the noble Lord any intelligence as to the probable date on which the Examiners will unburden themselves to this House?

Lord PEART

My Lords, the "grape vine" suggests that it will be very soon.

Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTON

My Lords, when the noble Lord, Lord Byers, referred to the availability of nine-tenths of this Bill if we were prepared to drop certain clauses, would it not be a rather bad precedent to drop clauses in proportion to the amount of money which their opponents were to spend on lobbying?

Lord ORR-EWING

My Lords, will the noble Lord perhaps take this opportunity of confirming that the Examiners are Officers and servants of Parliament: there are two Examiners from the House of Commons and there are two Examiners who are Officers of the House of Lords, and it is therefore a misunderstanding on the part of the public and the media at large when they suggest that the House of Lords is somehow concerned with this reference to the Examiners?

Lord PEART

My Lords, I think I have explained that, and I am sure noble Lords on all sides of the House know what is happening.

Lord TREFGARNE

My Lords, will the noble Lord be so kind as to clarify what he said a moment ago: that certain parts of your Lordships' House had opposed the whole Bill?

Lord PEART

My Lords, I said that I did not want to get into political arguments at this stage. I think it is far better to await the Examiners' report.