HL Deb 20 July 1978 vol 395 cc508-13

69 Before Clause 62, insert the following new clause—

Voting of Scottish Members of Parliament (".—(1) Subject to subsection (2) of this section, if, following the first meeting of the Scottish Assembly, a Bill to which this section applies has been passed by the House of Commons but there would not have been a majority in support of the Bill if there had been excluded from the members who voted in the division of that House on the question that the Bill be read the Third time all those representing parliamentary constituencies in Scotland, that Bill shall be deemed not to have been read the Third time unless after the next fourteen days on which that House has sat after the division took place that House confirms its decision that the Bill be read the Third time. (2) Subsection (1) of this section shall not come into operation unless it has been approved by a resolution of the House of Commons. (3) This section applies to any Bill which does not relate to or concern Scotland or any part of Scotland.")

70 In the Title, line 2, after ("Scotland") insert ("and in the procedure of Parliament")

The Commons disagreed to the above Amendments for, the following Reason:

71 Because no change in the procedure of the House of Commons is justified.

Lord CAMPBELL of CROY

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth not insist on Amendments Nos. 69 and 70, to which the Commons have disagreed for the Reason numbered 71, but propose the Amendments in lieu thereof as set out on the White Paper. There is a grotesque structural fault in this Bill. Our Amendment which went to the other place made an attempt to alleviate the situation. We admitted that it could not completely correct the Bill, because that would have needed reconstruction and the amendment of a very large part of it; but it did give the other place the opportunity to discuss this subject on the basis of a change of procedure, and it was effective in drawing attention to this very serious flaw, for, in the Division, there was a tie.

The Government have made no attempt to solve this problem since the original devolution White Paper. They have pretended that the problem does not exist. We believe it should have been tackled right at the beginning. It has been known as the "West Lothian question", I understand, because the Bill as it stands would result in the Member for West Lothian speaking and voting on various subjects relating, say, to West Ham or West Bromwich, but not having any vote on what was going on in West Lothian. The position of Scottish MPs would be that they would be able to influence what was happening in English domestic affairs, such as health and education, but they would not be responsible for those subjects where Scotland was concerned and where their constituencies were concerned, because of the Assembly sitting in Edinburgh. When the moment comes that a decision purely on English domestic matters would have been taken one way, simply because the Scottish Members caused a majority, even though there was a majority within the English Membership in the other direction, then we believe the situation would be regarded as intolerable and, indeed, dangerous.

I will not repeat the arguments which have already been given by my noble friend Lord Ferrers and my right honourable friend Mr. Francis Pym. The main difference from the Amendment which was passed at our Report stage is that we have inserted Second Reading instead of Third Reading. That was a substitution proposed by my right honourable friend in another place. I am certain that we should give the other place a further opportunity to discuss this matter and to vote upon it again.

Moved, That the House doth not insist on Amendments Nos. 69 and 70 to which the Commons have disagreed but proposes the Amendments in lieu thereof set out on the Order Paper.—(Lord Campbell of Croy.)

Lord McCLUSK EY

My Lords, can I try to follow the excellent example set by the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy, and be brief. It is perhaps a little inconsistent for the noble Lord opposite to move that this House should accept the verdict of the other place on a decision arrived at on the casting vote of the Deputy Speaker, but send back to the other place a revised version of the new clause virtually in a form which was defeated in the other place by the quite handsome majority of six votes.

The change of the focal point for a second vote from Third to Second Reading and the narrowing of the ambit of the main condition precedent, I would ackknowledge, are perhaps minor improvements; but they do not overcome the important issues of principle and practicality which were discussed when we last considered this matter and which were further explained by my right honourable friend the Minister of State when he replied to the debate in the other place. These are essentially matters for the other place and it is not for this House to tell the other place what procedures it should adopt for the conduct of its business. When this Amendment was debated on earlier occasions in your Lordships' House, many speakers made it clear that they thought the proposed system would not work, although some of them in fact finally supported it in the Lobbies. However, the new clause was approved on the grounds that the other place should be given an opportunity to discuss what has become known as the "West Lothian question". The other place has now debated that issue again and has decided against this proposal. Certainly there was a tie, as has been referred to, but, after reflecting overnight, when they came to consider the consequential Amendment for a change in the Long Title they rejected that by a majority of 33–295 votes to 262—which suggests that over night wiser counsels had prevailed.

I realise that I am uttering words which, though they may call forth occasional cries of mirth from the Benches opposite, are not going to move their stony hearts, and I think your Lordships will expect to have a vote on this matter. I urge your Lordships to accept the decision which has come from another place; but your Lordships will take your own decision on that.

Lord CAMPBELL of CROY

My Lords, I do not think I need reply, but this is a matter which should go to another place. Therefore, I do not propose to withdraw my Motion.

The LORD CHANCELLOR

The Question is that the House do not insist on their Amendments Nos. 69 and 70 to which the Commons have disagreed but propose the Amendments in lieu thereof set out on the Order Paper.

7 p.m.

On Question, Whether the said Motion shall be agreed to?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 104; Not-Contents, 81.

CONTENTS
Ailesbury, M. Gisborough, L. Nugent of Guildford, L.
Alexander of Tunis, E. Glenkinglas, L. Pender, L.
Alport, L. Gray, L. Penrhyn, L.
Amory, V. Greenway, L. Polwarth, L.
Ampthill, L. Gridley, L. Raglan, L.
Auckland, L. Hailsham of Saint Marylebone, L. Rankeillour, L.
Balerno, L. Rathcreedan, L.
Belstead, L. Harcourt, V. Rawlinson of Ewell, L.
Bolton, L. Harmar-Nicholls, L. Redcliffe-Maud, L.
Brookeborough, V. Henley, L. Reigate, L.
Brougham and Vaux, L. Hereford, V. Robbins, L.
Burton, L. Home of the Hirsel, L. Rochdale, V.
Campbell of Croy, L. Hood, V. Romney, E.
Carrington, L. Hylton-Foster, B. Ruthven of Freeland, Ly.
Cathcart, E. Kemsley, V. St. Davids, V.
Clitheroe, L. Killearn, L. Sandys, L.
Cork and Orrery, E. Kinnaird, L. Selkirk, E.
Craigavon, V. Lauderdale, E. Spens, L.
Crathorne, L. Linlithgow, M. Strathclyde, L.
Cullen of Ashbourne, L. Long, V. Strathcona and Mount Royal, L
Daventry, V. Lothian, M. Sudeley, L.
Denham, L. [Teller.] Lyell, L. [Teller.] Swinfen, L.
Digby, L. Malmesbury, E. Thorneycroft, L.
Drumalbyn, L. Mansfield, E. Torphichen, L.
Dulverton, L. Margadale, L. Trenchard, V.
Dundee, E. Marley, L. Tweedale, M.
Ellenborough, L. Massereene and Ferrard, V. Tweedsmuir, L.
Elles, B. Minto, E. Vernon, L.
Elliot of Harwood, B. Monk Bretton, L. Vickers, B.
Elton, L. Monson, L. Vivian, L.
Faithfull, B. Morris, L. Ward of North Tyneside, B.
Falkland, V. Mottistone, L. Westbury, L.
Ferrier, L. Napier and Ettrick, L. Wigg, L.
Forbes, L. Newall, L. Wilson of Langside, L.
Fortescue, E. Northchurch, B. Young, B.
NOT-CONTENTS
Ardwick, L. Brown, L. Donnet of Balgay, L.
Aylestone, L. Bruce of Donington, L. Elwyn-Jones, L. (L. Chancellor.)
Balogh, L. Burton of Coventry, B. Evans of Claughton, L.
Banks, L. Castle, L. Gaitskell, B.
Beaumont of Whitley, L. Collison, L. Gardiner, L.
Birk, B. David, B. Gladwyn, L.
Brimelow, L. Davies of Leek, L. Glenamara, L.
Brockway, L. Diamond, L. Gordon-Walker, L.
Goronwy-Roberts, L. Lloyd of Hampstead, L. Sefton of Garston, L.
Greenwood of Rossendale, L. Lloyd of Kilgerran, L. Segal, L.
Gregson, L. Lockwood, B. Shepherd, L.
Hale, L. Lovell-Davis, L. Simon, V.
Hampton, L. McCluskey, L. Snow, L.
Hanworth, V. Mackie of Benshie, L. Stewart of Alvechurch, B.
Harris of Greenwich, L. Maelor, L. Stone, L.
Hatch of Lusby, L. Melchett, L. Strabolgi, L.
Henderson, L. Murrav of Gravesend, L. Wade, L.
Howie of Troon, L. Northfield, L. Wall, L.
Hughes, L. Oram, L. Wallace of Coslany, L.[Teller.]
Hutchinson of Lullington, L. Peart, L. (L. Privy Seal.) Wells-Pestell, L.[Teller.]
Jacobson, L. Perth, E. Whaddon, L.
Jacques, L. Phillips, B. White, B.
Janner, L. Pitt of Hampstead, L. Wigoder, L.
Kennet, L. Plant, L. Winstanley, L.
Kilbrandon, L. Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L. Winterbottom, L.
Kirkhill, L. Ritchie-Calder, L. Wynne-Jones, L.
Leonard, L. Rochester, L.
Llewelvn-Davies of Hastoe, B. Sainsbury, L.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Resolved in the affirmative, and Motion agreed to accordingly.

Lord STRABOLGI

My Lords, I beg to move that further consideration of the Commons Amendments and Reasons be now adjourned.