§ Baroness LLEWELYN-DAVIES of HASTOEMy Lords, with the permission of the House, may I ask the noble Lord the Chief Whip a question about to-day's business? In view of the length of the list of speakers to-day on the Housing Bill, is it still the Government's intention to take the Iran trading sanctions orders at such a late hour tonight? I think the House had hoped that, since these orders do not lapse until 28 days after they have been laid, and since there has been such widespread interest in the House about them, the Government might have found another time for them.
§ Lord DENHAMMy Lords, I appreciate that, in view of the length of the list of speakers for the Second Reading of the Housing Bill this afternoon, it may well mean that the House might consider the two Iran sanctions orders at a rather later hour than would be desirable; but Her Majesty's Government are most anxious that Parliament should have an opportunity to consider these orders as soon as possible after they are laid. They have in fact already been considered in another place—they were considered last Wednesday—and I think your Lordships may feel that, in view of that, too, it would possibly be undesirable that it was left too long before they were considered in this House.
Having said that, of course we have a rather full programme of legislation at the moment, and it is very difficult to know which day to choose so as to be least inconvenient to your Lordships. Last 15 Thursday and Friday, for instance, we were very much taken up with the Transport Bill. They, of course, could have been possible days on which to take them; but I took the view that possibly that might have been even more inconvenient to your Lordships than choosing today. I hope the House will agree that at this late stage it would be wrong to postpone consideration of these two orders, important though they are. I regret very much the inconvenience to those noble Lords who are intending to take part in the debate on them, but if I may express the hope that the debate on the Second Reading of the Housing Bill, important though that Bill is, will not be too prolonged, then we may reach these two important orders at not quite so late an hour.
§ Lord BYERSMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord when he thinks the debate on the Iran sanctions orders is going to come on tonight? If it is going to be any time after 8 o'clock, it will be quite wrong, in our view, to take them at such a late hour.
§ Lord DENHAMMy Lords, it is very difficult to work out from a list of speakers exactly when an item of business will be reached. I hope it will not be nearly as late as the hour which the noble Lord, Lord Byers, indicates. I am hoping we may start taking these orders well before 9 o'clock.
§ Baroness LLEWELYN-DAVIES of HASTOEMy Lords, the noble Lord is always courteous and always mindful of the convenience of the House, but has he not dug a pit and fallen into it himself? Has he not provided for the House a totally indigestible programme of legislation—so much so that, if this side of the House were sitting on the Government side, the protests from the Conservative Benches about the amount of important business which was being pushed through at a totally unreasonable hour would have been legion?
§ Lord DENHAMMy Lords, I am quite certain that, if it is possible to dig a pit and fall into it oneself, I will have done so. But I would say to the noble Baroness that this is a difficult Session —the pit that I have dug—but previous 16 Governments have dug equally deep pits, and the inconvenience to your Lordships has been possibly as great on those occasions.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, on another aspect of the important submission made by my noble friend on the Front Bench, the Opposition Chief Whip, may I ask the noble Lord whether it is correct, as reported in the Official Report of another place, that it is the intention of the Government, after your Lordships' House has dealt with this subject, that it shall be dealt with in another place, not by normal procedure but by the guillotine; and, if that is so, is that not going a bit too far with an important measure of this character?
§ Lord DENHAMMy Lords, my understanding is that these orders have already been approved by another place.
The Earl of HALSBURYMy Lords, does the noble Lord agree that if speakers on the Second Reading of the Housing Bill were to do what they are asked to do, which is to confine their speeches to 10 minutes, with an extra 10 minutes for the three Front Benches speakers, then the whole debate would be through in four hours and, as it is now three o'clock, we would be through by seven?
§ Lord DENHAMMy Lords, I think that is probably true. I also think that if that desirable scheme of things were to take place, the debate on the Housing Bill would be very much better for it.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, while appreciating the difficulties of the noble Lord, may I ask him this question: In view of the fact that since we discussed this matter in this House further modifications have been made in the proposals for sanctions, ought we not to have a much greater opportunity than late tonight to discuss this order, the lateness of which will make it impossible for some of us who are very concerned about the matter to attend?
§ Lord DENHAMMy Lords, I understand that, although there may have been changes since the parent Act went through, there have not been any changes since the orders were laid. That is my understanding.
§ Lord FOOTMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether there is the slightest prospect of speakers on the Housing Bill confining themselves to 10 minutes; and if they did would not this be wholly unprecendented in the history of this House?
§ Lord DENHAMMy Lords, it would be none the less desirable.