§ 2.51 p.m.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are now in a position to give an assurance that the Bill to provide for direct elections to the European Parliament will be given sufficient priority to ensure that the Boundary Commission can complete their recommendations for Parliament's consideration in ample time before May/June 1978; and whether they will now say what procedure and timetable they have in mind.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Harris of Greenwich)My Lords, the Government have already made it clear that they will introduce legislation to provide for the election of United Kingdom Members of the European Assembly;' but, as I explained to the House in the debate on 15th December, there are a number of important matters to be decided before the Bill can be introduced.
Lord CHELWOODMy Lords, I confess that I find that reply both mystifying and very disappointing indeed. Is not time running out, and has not a lot of time been lost for unexplained reasons? May I put to the noble Lord one specific question: Have the Government decided that, when the Bill receives a Second Reading in another place and the Boundary Commission can be invited 228 to start with their work, there is no constitutional or technical reason why that should not be done? Were this to be done and the Bill to receive Royal Assent by July, am I right in saying that there is no obstacle whatsoever to direct elections being held in mid-1978, something which Mr. Roy Jenkins has described as absolutely vital?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, a number of questions arise on what the noble Lord has just said. With great respect to him, I do not think that my Answer can be particularly mystifying or that I have not explained the reasons. I have given the reasons; and, as I set them out in the debate we had on 15th December, the reasons were that we were studying with a proper sense of urgency the recommendations of the Select Committee in another place, which raise a number of matters of fundamental importance. On the more detailed question which the noble Lord raises about the Boundary Commission, it is certainly true that if the Boundary Commission procedure is adopted the Boundary Commission probably could do some preliminary work before the Bill received Royal Assent.
§ Lord BYERSMy Lords, is it not a fact that, owing to the congestion which is arising in another place, there could be a very real danger to this Bill, and that we may not be able to meet any reasonable timetable at all? In these circumstances, would the noble Lord talk to the Leader of the House with a view to getting this Bill introduced first of all into this House rather than another place?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I take note, of course, of what the noble Lord has said. This Bill is a matter of great importance, and certainly I will ensure that what the noble Lord has just said is drawn to the attention of my right honourable friend.
§ Lord CARRINGTONMy Lords, would the noble Lord accept that there are a number of noble Lords on all sides of the House who really are worried about what seems to be the Government's lack of urgency in dealing with this matter? Would he give an undertaking that a Bill will be through Parliament with enough time for the Boundary Commission to consider it in time for direct elections 229 to take place? Would he also deny the rumour and the suspicion that the Government are somehow going to bargain time for the devolution Bill in another place for the direct elections Bill in that place?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I must say it is the first time I have heard that particular ugly suggestion expressed; I take note of the fact that presumably the noble Lord believes it to be true. Certainly we recognise, as I have indicated, that this is a matter of great importance. The Bill is set out in the gracious Speech; and in the preamble to the decision on direct elections, which was agreed on 20th September last year, was included a "best endeavours" clause in which the British Government agreed with their partners that they would aim to ensure that these elections take place in the period between May and June of next year. That was our position last September and that is our position today.
§ Lord GLADWYNMy Lords, are the Government aware that in a recent authoritative poll conducted last November in all the Nine EEC countries, just over 70 per cent. of those interrogated said that direct elections should be held while only 14 per cent. were opposed. The corresponding figures in this country were 57 per cent. for, and I think 22 per cent. against, of which only 8 per cent., however, were strongly opposed? Will the Government therefore take all the necessary steps to overcome the opposition to direct elections of a small minority in this country which is clearly determined to sabotage them if it can?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I take note of what the noble Lord has just said. I have no doubt that a majority of people within the Community, and indeed within this country, are in favour of the principle of direct elections. As I have indicated, that is the view of the Government.
§ Lord O'HAGANMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that his Answer is feeble and discouraging? Surely, while they hold the presidency of the Council of Ministers, the Government should be giving other Member States in the Community an example, and not lagging behind in this important step which will help to make the European institutions 230 more accountable. Could the noble Lord explain the double standards used by the Government, whereby Members of the Government, speaking in this Chamber, refer to the European Parliament as the "European Assembly", while the Foreign Minister when speaking in the European Parliament calls it the "European Parliament"?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I would not think there is anything particularly significant about that. I call it the Assembly because it calls itself the Assembly.
§ Lord O'HAGANNo.
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHThat seems to me a rather adequate reason. On the question the noble Lord has raised, I perfectly well accept that there may be some anxiety about the time-scale, but I must draw his attention to the fact that we received the Report of the Select Committee in another place only in November. There are a number of major questions involved affecting election law and practice so far as these direct elections are concerned. Certainly it is our desire to press on with this matter as urgently as possible.
§ Lord SLATERMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether the Boundary Commission to which he refers is the present Boundary Commission which decides the boundaries governing constituency areas within this country of those sitting in the other place? Are we talking about the same Boundary Commission? Secondly, can the noble Lord tell the House what proposals have been submitted in toto from the Opposition Parties—that is the Conservative Party, looked upon as Her Majesty's Opposition in the other place and in this place, and the Liberal Party? What proposals have they submitted to Her Majesty's Government in regard to this matter?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, the Boundary Commission I was referring to was in fact the Parliamentary Boundary Commission. On the second point, the Party opposite, and indeed all political Parties, had members on the Select Committee in another place which went into this matter. They took evidence from the political Parties and a great 231 many other people on the procedures which should be used during these elections.
§ Lord GORE-BOOTHMy Lords, may I ask the Minister, on a slightly less controversial note, whether he can give an assurance that in considering this matter the Government have constantly in mind the undesirability of our being in a minority of one in this matter? We have to do this sometimes in the national interest, but in general it is not desirable.
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I entirely take the point raised by the noble Lord. As I indicated, the Government agreed to this "best endeavours" clause last September. That was our position then, and it is our position now.
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I hope noble Lords will accept that we have had a good run on this Question.
§ Lord PEARTNo, my Lords. Time is getting on.