HL Deb 06 November 1984 vol 457 cc4-18

Bill, pro forma, read a first time.

ADDRESS IN REPLY TO HER MAJESTY'S MOST GRACIOUS SPEECH

The Queen's Speech reported by The LORD CHANCELLOR.

3.45 p.m.

Earl Cathcart

My Lords, I beg to move, That a humble Address be presented to Her Majesty as follows:

"Most Gracious Sovereign—We, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, beg leave to thank Your Majesty for the most gracious Speech which Your Majesty has addressed to both Houses of Parliament".

This occasion not only provides us with the opportunity to thank Her Majesty for her most gracious Speech, but is also an occasion when we can re-affirm our loyalty and admiration for Her Majesty, not only as our Sovereign and Head of State throughout the Commonwealth, but as head of a much loved family whose journeys both at home and abroad are so much appreciated by so many people of every race, creed and nationality.

I must thank my noble friend the Leader of the House for the very great honour that he has done me by giving me this opportunity to propose this Motion. We served together in the same battalion of the Scots Guards during the war—and even then, on that occasion, I was serving under him!

During the next 12 months Her Majesty will receive state visits from the Presidents of Malawi and Mexico—two nations with strong influence in two very different but important parts of the world. It is good to learn that Her Majesty will pay a state visit to Portugal, a long-standing friend and now again alongside us in membership of NATO. Portugal occupies a place geographically and strategically vital to the security of the Atlantic, and already it has expressed a wish to join the Western European Union, which has only recently received so much encouragement from President Mitterrand of France. We provide the largest market for Portuguese exports and it is good that soon we may expect her to join the European Community.

Her Majesty's Government are to be congratulated on negotiating a draft agreement with China on the future of Hong Kong. There are undoubted advantages in this agreement to both countries, and it is to be hoped that its terms having been found suitable by the people of Hong Kong, their future freedom and prosperity can be secured.

I am delighted to hear that once again Her Majesty is going to attend the next series of most important meetings of the Commonwealth Heads of Government, to be held on this occasion in the Caribbean. It is a most important corner of the Commonwealth, containing, as it does, 13 independent Commonwealth countries, and with many problems special to that part of the world.

I have the honour of being Deputy Grand President to His Royal Highness Prince Philip, who is Grand President of the British Commonwealth Ex-Services League. The league was founded by Field Marshal Lord Haig in 1921, with nine member organisations, basically at that time to help the colonies, as they were then known, to look after their ex-servicemen, their widows and the dependants in the same way as, for example, the Royal British Legion looks after ours. The aim of the Commonwealth League is to ensure that no ex-serviceman or woman who served in the armed forces of the Crown, or their widows or dependants, should ever be without help or advice if in need.

Now, 63 years later, and increased to 53 member organisations, the British Commonwealth Ex-Services League still holds true to that same aim. Every third year, in a different Commonwealth country, the league holds a three-day conference. Last year His Royal Highness the Grand President opened the conference at Windsor Castle, and three years before that it was held in Ottawa. In 1986, the Returned Services League of Australia will host the conference in Adelaide, South Australia. It is exhilerating at these conferences to hear Commonwealth delegations from every corner of the world discussing ex-servicemen's problems, to see how best they can provide help where it is most needed in a spirit of comradeship and mutual support.

In 1984, as many ex-servicemen of the Commonwealth and their widows and dependants are reaching their 60s and 70s and 80s, and are no longer able to earn their living or to fend for themselves, the urgent need is for retirement homes and flats, and nowhere is this need more urgent than in those newly independent countries of the Commonwealth not yet able to establish a satisfactory security and welfare state of their own. It is this problem more than any other that the British Commonwealth Ex-Services League is helping to provide for.

Before I turn to matters of defence, I should like to endorse the high priority that Her Majesty's Government give to arms control and disarmament and to working for the resumption of those negotiations which have been broken off. Never before has mankind had available such an excellent mechanism or such satisfactory forums to enable nations to negotiate arms control and disarmament without endangering their own sovereignty. Yet these negotiations bog down or get broken off with such regularity that one begins to despair that the practice of negotiation is becoming a lost art.

In arms control negotiations, as indeed in all other negotiations, both sides must come to the negotiating table with a sense of reality and a desire to achieve a negotiated solution. I am sure that the best way to achieve a lasting peace is to negotiate step by step for balanced and verifiable reductions in both nuclear and conventional forces. I hope that the recent initiative by NATO in the otherwise stagnant MBFR negotiations in Vienna, to limit discussion initially to combat and combat support forces only, will be accepted. I hope that this initiative will lead to a general loosening up of discussion in this valuable forum for peace.

Everybody will acknowledge the highest priority which Her Majesty's Government give to the maintenance of national security and their determination to continue to play an active part in the Atlantic Alliance. The reference to defence interests outside the NATO area acknowledges that, with modern technology and communications, Western defence interests cannot be confined solely to Western Europe and the Atlantic. It is a matter of regret that national defence has become such a controversial matter, polarised as it is between nuclear and conventional and between unilateral disarmament and multilateral disarmament.

We must all welcome the intention referred to in the gracious Speech to combat vigorously all forms of international terrorism. The awful examples we have experienced in the last few years, and even more recently, indicate that only the firmest and most vigorous methods will succeed. I have long been of the opinion that, as the range of crime extends, our scale of punishment is inadequate to provide a proper differential of punishment to deter. Only yesterday the result of a poll showed that this country had the highest overall crime rate in Europe for housebreaking, robbery and assault, while at the other end of the range of crime there has come upon the scene terrorism and drug trafficking. As the range of serious crime grows, the scale of punishment has narrowed so that the difference between the punishment for a crime of one degree is only marginally less than the punishment for a greater crime.

I well appreciate the arguments against long prison sentences and in favour of parole and the commuting of sentences for good behaviour, but there is still a need to review what I call the differential between crime and punishment. The statement made by the Home Secretary in November last year on the parole system has already gone a long way to rectify this differential. But I hope that the measures announced in the gracious Speech to establish a national prosecution service and for the Attorney-General to have the ability to refer Crown Court sentences for the opinion of the Court of Appeal may go still further to ensure that the scale of punishments is appropriate to the crime in relation to other crimes.

I think it is right that on this occasion we should pay tribute to the police force, and I should like to stress that in paying this tribute I do not want today to stir up any discussion of their conduct on the picket lines. But with a rising crime rate and ever-increasing problems on our roads, together with, at the top end of the range of crime, terrorism, drug abuse, and hard drug pushing, they already have their hands full. If one adds to this their duty on the picket lines, their duty of escorting, and sometimes protecting, perfectly legal but now very frequent marches and demonstrations, and the totally unforgivable football hooliganism at every weekend, one can see that the duties and responsibilities of our police force have grown enormously. In spite of this, they maintain a smart and efficient appearance and, in the opinion of most people, they do an excellent job, for which they should be thanked and congratulated. Although it is not quite in the same context, I think it would be wrong not to pay tribute at the same time to the Ulster Defence Regiment, who police Northern Ireland under the most difficult conditions.

Although your Lordships assembled under or new and magnificent ceiling for a few days at the close of our last Session, I believe that your Lordships will think it appropriate that we should congratulate the Works of Art Committee of your Lordships' House and the Department of the Environment on the successful completion of what was a major renovation. Let us hope that the ornamental bosses are now firmly secure and no longer liable to bombard us.

The vivid, new blue carpet is an exact replica of the original to Pugin's design. Your Lordships' Chamber must now once again look exactly as it did when Mr. Barry showed Queen Victoria round the new Chamber on 13th April 1847. Some of your Lordships may think the carpet is too vivid a blue, but I am sure that as your Lordships move about your business it will quickly be toned down.

There is one interesting difference between this carpet and our last one, the remnants of which can still be seen in the voting lobbies. As your Lordships can see, I stand here today before you, the very model of a modern major-general—complete with sword. In our last carpet there were two red lines down the front of each Front Bench. Although in your Lordships' House our debates never get unduly heated, and certainly not to the extent that we would ever draw our swords, those lines were in fact sword lines. They were placed at a sufficient distance apart so that even if the two Front Benches drew their swords, the tips would not touch, and no harm would be done.

But the sword lines have been omitted from our new carpet, not because your Lordships' conduct has altered in any way, but because, although there are some places where sword lines are essential, research has shown that they have never been required in your Lordships' House. Sword lines were included in the last carpet in error. However, I must warn noble Lords opposite that, sword lines or no sword lines, my noble friend who is to second this Motion is wearing the full dress of an archer in the Royal Company of Archers, a body of men armed with bows and arrows, and that they normally fire at ranges of up to 200 yards.

Describing the scene when the House of Lords first assembled in their new Chamber on 15th April 1847, The Times correspondent gave his best, and he really excelled himself. He said this—and I quote: Descriptions of this magnificent hall fail through no want of skill in the describer but from the imperfection of language to present an adequate image of its gorgeousness and grandeur". He continued: When first entering it, the eye is dazzled and distracted by the richness and profusion of the ornaments. However, the exquisite harmony which reigns throughout soon sobers the senses and surprise subsides into admiration". He ended with these words: The Woolsack, the tables and the chain of the Peers when compared with the luxurious aspects of the other furniture have a rather homely appearance". We have a full and important parliamentary programme before us. Whether our furnishings make your Lordships feel at home I know not, but I do know that your Lordships will conduct this business with the same thorough care and attention to detail for which your Lordships' House is so justly renowned. Now, my Lords, I beg to move the Motion for a humble Address to Her Majesty.

Moved, That a humble Address be presented to Her Majesty in the following terms:

"Most Gracious Sovereign—We, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, beg leave to thank Your Majesty for the most gracious Speech which Your Majesty has addressed to both Houses of Parliament".—(Earl Cathcart.)

4.4 p.m.

The Earl of Dundee

My Lords, I beg to second my noble friend's Motion for a humble Address in reply to Her Majesty's most gracious Speech. Before so doing, I should like to say to my noble friends the Leader of the House and the Chief Whip how grateful I am to them for inviting me to speak. And as Her Majesty's Hereditary Standard Bearer for Scotland I consider it a particular honour to be asked in that capacity to address your Lordships today.

I am also glad to be seconding my noble friend Lord Cathcart. As a separate duty, he and I are both members of the Queen's Bodyguard for Scotland, the Royal Company of Archers. My noble friend has already given your Lordships some useful information on the subject of bows and arrows. My noble friend, who is a senior officer in the Royal Company of Archers, is often in charge of the proceedings when we parade. That of course is not the only reason why I am always very polite to him, but I continue to hope that when we next both meet on the Edinburgh parade ground he will take a lenient view of any imperfections in my drill, and I am happy to say that so far he always has.

As my noble friend has said, in the gracious Speech we were all reminded of our great debt to Her Majesty for the work she carries out as Head of the Commonwealth, as our ambassador overseas and for her tireless association with all aspects of life in this country. This work on our behalf, and the personal affection in which Her Majesty is held, provide a much needed sense of national unity and continuity.

In September it was a great pleasure for everyone to be able to celebrate the birth of their second child to the Prince and Princess of Wales. But not to be outdone, in the following month, October, your Lordships' House proved that it could provide birthdays of its own which are of national appeal. In his reply to the centenary tributes, the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, reminded us of the proper connection between political debate and the national interest. Clearly, the country's interests are not best served by universal agreement on a wide range of topics. Such consensus does not come naturally and thus, where evident, if it ever is, may well only reflect too little imagination or too much state control. But as the noble Lord pointed out, by far the most important consensus is that debate and discussion should always be free from malice, and the alternative point of view respected however much disputed.

This attitude towards controversy is clearly essential to the quality of freedom of speech which it is the aim of this country and other democracies to uphold. Equally, it is clearly essential to the quality of freedom of worship. But although toleration comes in varying degrees, nevertheless most western democracies can be justly proud that within their boundaries no persecution and imprisonment occur on account of religious beliefs and political views themselves, provided that these are dissociated from terrorism and violence. The intention expressed in the gracious Speech, to encourage freedom and human rights elsewhere, and in areas of tension or oppression abroad, is therefore to be welcomed; and in particular the intention to work for the restoration of the independence of Afghanistan, a settlement in Namibia and a solution to the Arab-Israel dispute.

The gracious Speech also mentions the commitment to maintain the aid programme and to promote investment in developing countries. Apart from that, it is very much to be hoped that proper efforts and proper advance plans will be made by the EEC and by the United States to ensure that the overproduction of food supplies on both sides of the Atlantic can be used in parts of the world which threaten drought and famine, and in particular at the moment in Ethiopia.

Turning to the question of national security, there is, first, the fear of nuclear war and of foreign aggression. As my noble friend Lord Cathcart has already pointed out, by far the best guarantee of our safety is to negotiate from a position of strength and to work towards a practical programme of verifiable multilateral disarmament as distinct from unilateral disarmament either by ourselves or by other members of the Western Alliance.

Secondly, within the country there is of course the concern that all urban and rural communities should be protected adequately against crime and violence. We all know that our police force has the envy and respect of the world for the way in which it maintains law and order without the use of firearms and without resort to indentity cards. But constant vigilance should be exercised to preserve this advantage, to ease their burden and co-operate with the work of the police, and to build up trust between the force and all places and sections in society.

Then there is the consideration of everyday needs and wants. Perhaps the two most important of these are a guaranteed minimum standard of living paid in state benefits, and secondly the provision of jobs. But while the poverty of unemployment can now be cushioned in a way that it could not be cushioned before the establishment of the welfare state, there is still no way at all in which state benefits of one type or another can remove the degredation and dispair of unemployment. The despair of school-leavers and of young people is clearly the worst problem of all.

The commitment in the gracious Speech to introduce employment opportunities, training and work experience is therefore to be welcomed and encouraged. In this connection, it is very much to be hoped that positive incentives will be given to business and industry. Also in connection with employment, I am glad that a Bill is proposed to improve occupational pension rights for people leaving schemes before pensionable age.

In regard to the proposed management of the economy, there is probably not much evidence to indicate that Her Majesty's Government model their policies on those carried out on the continent of Asia. Yet, conversely, Her Majesty's Government must have taken heart from recent announcements which suggest that some of the economic policies they support—notably, those concerning private enterprise and competition—are about to be adopted by the People's Republic of China. Many of your Lordships will have deeply-held and differing views on the subject of the management of the economy. However, we would probably all tend to agree to reduce inflation further, and to be prepared to shift the balance in the mixed economy—as and when there is evidence in certain cases that more competition and private enterprise can raise production and improve living standards.

The gracious Speech refers also to particular parts of the United Kingdom. On Northern Ireland, it is very much to be welcomed that the security forces will continue to receive full support and that good relations will be maintained with the Irish Republic. It is generally agreed that two initiatives well worth continuing should be to obtain the disaffection of the Catholic population from the IRA; and, secondly, to reassure the Protestants about the intentions of the Republic.

Another local reference in the gracious Speech is to proposed legislation affecting the Greater London Council and the metropolitan county councils. I do not expect that all your Lordships will be in complete agreement about that. But I am sure that when the Bill comes to this House the proceedings on it will be followed by the media with keen attention. What is certain is that your Lordships will give to the detail of the Bill the highest quality of scrutiny and revision.

Moving north from London—in the opposite direction from Dr. Johnson—and as a man who now treads more familiar and safer ground, I step across the border for a moment to say a few words about Scotland. The gracious Speech refers to some changes in Scottish law. All of us in Scotland are very proud of Scottish law—and we appreciate it just as much even when we understand it very little! What is generally well understood in your Lordships' House and in another place is that the quality of parliamentary legislation from the United Kingdom is all the better owing to cross-fertilisation and comparison, where relevant, between separate Scottish business and separate English business.

In Scotland, the probems of the lowlands are of course very different from those of the highlands and islands—which have half the geographical area but only 6 per cent. of the Scottish population. Both the Scottish Development Agency and the Highlands and Islands Development Board have some encouraging figures for jobs created and retained and for new opportunities given. I am sure Her Majesty's Government will continue to give these agencies their full support. But Scotland is prone to suffer more when the rest of the United Kingdom undergoes inflation and recession. And conversely, even when conditions improve elsewhere, there is still the risk that people will succumb to the temptation to leave their home ground in order to find jobs in the south and abroad. In view of that, every opportunity must always be taken to promote long-term investment in Scotland by business and industry. Another aspect deserving special attention is the need to improve Scottish housing conditions.

In summary, in considering the questions of human rights, national security, the provision of everyday needs, and the management of the economy, the gracious Speech is to be commended for the specific intentions and proposals it introduces. And with its framework to be built upon, we should be able to look forward to a constructive Session.

I thank your Lordships for listening to these remarks with such courtesy and patience, and I beg to second my noble friend's Motion for a Humble Address to Her Majesty.

4.17 p.m.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, I beg to move that this debate be adjourned until tomorrow.

It is my very pleasant task to congratulate the two noble Earls who so ably moved and seconded the Motion. Both noble Earls are Scottish, and they exemplify the enormous contribution which the representatives of that great nation have made to the country and in this House. Dr. Samuel Johnson was good enough to say that, Much … may be made of a Scotsman, if he be caught young". It is clear that the noble Earls, Lord Cathcart and Lord Dundee, were both caught very young indeed.

The long and distinguished military career of the noble Earl, Lord Cathcart, has always been well reflected in his speeches in this House, and we listen to him with very great respect. Tomorrow we shall be debating defence and foreign affairs, and I know that many noble Lords will wish to refer to the issues of disarmament and defence, and to the Commonwealth, which the noble Earl raised in his thoughtful speech today. I may add that we appreciate the noble Earl's presence on the Woolsack from time to time and the work he does as a chairman of our committees in this House.

The Motion was well seconded by the noble Earl, Lord Dundee, who also made an excellent speech. I have noted two things about the noble Earl. First, he is the hereditary Royal Standard Bearer for Scotland—an old and honourable distinction. Secondly, he decided to bring colour and variety into his life by marrying Miss Mary Llewellyn.

The noble Earl has given us an indication of his wide range of interest.s I see a promising recruit for the Committee stage of Bills (and I observed that the Government Chief Whip was looking appreciatively at the noble Earl) and, I hope, a recruit in other fields as well. I know that the House will look forward to hearing from the noble Earl, Lord Dundee, many times in the future.

As to the gracious Speech itself, we have looked forward to it because events must make it one of the most important in the post-war period. We have, however, read it in the press over the week-end—in full; that is, almost in full, because it was all there except for the last sentence, which the press, with misplaced confidence, left out. One can assume that in Fleet Street these days they pray for the blessing of Mr. Maxwell and Mr. Murdoch. But we badly need that last sentence in the gracious Speech because there is nothing else in it which gives us any hope that the major problems of the day are going to be tackled with the unswerving resolution which is essential at this time.

There are some very important Bills which we shall welcome; for example, the Bill which arises from the Cork report, and other interesting and valuable measures of law reform, which we appreciate. But there are other Bills which are provocative and doctrinaire—and against the background of our acute economic problems they are also irrelevant. In short, the gracious Speech is bland and over-optimistic on the major issues of the day.

The Government give the impression in this programme that all is going well and attracting widespread support, and that somehow or other the country is well satisfied with the progress that the Government are making. That is just not true. If the debates here and in another place can bring that home to the Government, then the next few days will be well spent. Many of the Government's most enthusiastic supporters are showing concern, as was clear in the CBI conference yesterday. Over the weekend the Sunday Times said that, time is running out on the Government's economic policies"— and the Sunday Times is disposed in a friendly way towards this Government. Yet this programme gives us no confidence that the Government have real solutions to the basic problems of the nation.

Is it not the truth that Britain is more divided today than it has been for many decades past? There is a growing gulf between rich and poor; between North and South; between public sector and private sector; between central and local government; and there is above all, as the noble Earl, Lord Dundee, reminded us in his speech, the continued appalling problem of unemployment. These are the divisions which stimulate the extremes of the political spectrum and throw a menacing shadow over the future.

I wish I could say that the gracious Speech will help to narrow the gulf, to bind the wounds and to unite the nation, but I fear it does none of these things. Indeed, it will exacerbate these things in some areas, such as local government and industry. The realities are, I am afraid, that the Government are afflicted with a serious lack of imagination and resilience—and that in the face of crisis. I have many friends in the Government in both Houses, and I have great respect, individually, for Ministers. I realise that they are men and women of great integrity who wish to serve the nation. But I put it to them now that if the Government do not mend their ways and realise the gravity of the path along which we are now being taken they, and all the rest of us, will live to regret it, and that very soon.

As to unemployment, may I say that we on this side of the House welcome the appointment of the noble Lord, Lord Young. He takes upon himself an important task, and we wish him all success. But I must say to him that he has an unenviable task unless the Government are prepared to modify their policies, especially their public exenditure plans. The CBI yesterday joined others in pressing for major work on the national infrastructure. The Economist said last week that the noble Lord, Lord Young, is asking this question: If the jobless cannot be priced off the register, can they be administered off it? The noble Lord will have an opportunity during this debate to tell us precisely what that means. However, if it means taking young people off the register and putting them on training programmes of various kinds, that, in itself, is not good enough unless there is a developing prospect that there is permanent work for them when the training is over.

In the debate during the next few days we should like to be told that there are such prospects; but if there are no clear plans for getting the economy right and if there are no clear plans for reducing unemployment, this programme is nothing more than chaff in the wind. We shall scrutinise the Bills that come before us with the greatest care and without the need for the sword lines to which the noble Earl referred. We shall fire the odd arrow across the Chamber and hope that it finds its mark; but the fact is that there is a great task ahead for the Government, and the object of the Opposition in these debates will be to bring home to them the gravity of the burden which they now carry and the hope that they will be able to acquit themselves well.

The brighter side is that the two noble Earls have given the Government a good start today. We hope that the debate will bring better news than the gracious Speech itself contains, for the nation is much in need of it. I beg to move.

Moved, That this debate be adjourned until tomorrow.—(Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos.)

4.26 p.m.

Baroness Seear

My Lords, speaking for the Alliance Benches I should like also to congratulate the noble Earls on the way in which they have spoken to the gracious Speech. Speaking as the first English person in today's debate I should like to say—because this is an occasion for congratulation, I think, to your Lordships' House as well as the noble Earls—what a very excellent example your Lordships' House gives of the way in which the problems of tribalism and of ethnic minorities can, in fact, be conquered by tolerance; after all, the tolerance of the English, may I add. We on these Benches believe passionately in devolution, but on this occasion I am glad that we have the representatives of both Scotland, beyond the Border, and Wales to contribute to the discussions both today and in the future.

Having said that, I welcome the gracious Speech, but like the previous speaker I am bound to say that I feel that in many ways the Government are obviously running out of ideas. Much is a continuation of what we have had before, and many of us do not much like what we have had before. There seems to be very little realisation that we are in a time of great distress and disturbance and that radical action is needed if we are to deal with the problems which confront us and which do not get better. Granted, some matters have improved. We have again and again acknowledged the improvement on the inflation front. But it is not good enough to remind us that more people are in employment today than previously. That is true, but it is a mockery to put it in that way when so many people are seeking employment, and seeking it in vain, with very little opportunity of finding it.

So I echo what the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, said: that while we welcome the appointment of the noble Lord, Lord Young, and while we greatly welcome the money being spent on training, the Government should listen not only to those of us in opposition who have put the point again and again, but to their own supporters and their own paymasters in the CBI who are saying that the time has come when the Government must see to it that some of the essential infrastructure work is done which is calling out to be done and which will give the opportunity for those who are training to find work when they have completed that training.

There are certain things in the gracious Speech which we can welcome, although, of course, we do not know what is meant by its general terms. We are glad to see that there is an intention for greater development inside the European Community. We hope that this will not be in the Gaullist spirit which has characterised the Government's attitude towards the European Community up to the present time.

We are also glad to see that the Government are committing themselves—though, of course, no figures are given in the gracious Speech—to greater assistance than in the past to the developing countries. The contribution of this country to the developing countries has not been distinguished. With the past that we have had in these countries, and our long established connections with many of them, we should surely be giving a lead in development; and so far that lead has been very difficult to see.

We look with hope to see that the words in the gracious Speech will be translated not only into legislation but into positive action, backed by adequate finance. Perhaps the horrors of recent weeks which have appeared on our television screens will remind us all of the necessity for active action to help in the development of those countries, which are, after all, a part of our common world and indeed a part of the opportunity for this country's economic development.

There is a great deal more that could be said and will be said in the days to come in debating the gracious Speech. I should like now only again to repeat my congratulations to the movers of the Address. I look forward to the debates in detail which will follow on the basis of what was said.

4.31 p.m.

The Lord President of the Council (Viscount Whitelaw)

My Lords, I am delighted to have the chance to follow the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos, and the noble Baroness, Lady Seear, and to thank them for their most generous remarks about my two noble friends who, as they said, have provided us with such a spendid start to the new Session. In a few minutes I shall have just a word or two to say about some of the more controversial parts of their speeches. I shall say only a word or two, because there will be other opportunities later on. Everybody appears to be declaring their nationality this afternoon, so perhaps I should say that those words may come appropriately from someone who was born a Scotsman; is a Scotsman; has represented an English constituency just over the border for nearly 30 years; has had some passing and problem times in connection with Northern Ireland; but has never, I think I am glad to say sometimes, had any particularly close connection with Wales.

My noble friend Lord Cathcart succeeded to his title, I understand, at the age of only eight and first took his seat in the House in 1941. In recent years he has, I know, made a full and respected contribution to the work of your Lordships' House. As he mentioned to your Lordships, he and I were close colleagues in the Army during the war. We both joined the Scots Guards at the beginning of it and both served in the 3rd tank battalion of that regiment at the end of it. He was kind enough to suggest that he served under me. I am not quite sure whether that was exactly correct, but it was just correct, I think.

However, he had far greater distinction than that. He actually commanded the squadron in which the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of Canterbury served. I do not know whether that is a unique position to be in, but it is certainly a very remarkable one. My noble friend and I therefore share many memories, starting with his 21st birthday party in 1940, with which I suspect neither of us now, at our advanced ages, wish to trouble your Lordships further.

My noble friend's authority when speaking on defence matters is unquestioned. I can only say of that that if at one moment in time he served under me, very properly the Army kept him on for a long time as a general, whereas it was only too delighted to get rid of me to politics at a fairly early stage. Since then, as the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, said, my noble friend has also performed a considerable role as a Deputy Speaker and a Deputy Chairman. I should like to associate myself with what the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, said about the work of all our Deputy Chairmen. Without it the House could not function, and we all of us have reason to be grateful to my noble friend and to all the Deputy Chairmen. I know that I am also speaking for my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor when I say that. They give him very considerable help.

My noble friend Lord Dundee, in contrast to my noble friend Lord Cathcart, has come to the House only recently. Indeed, he is one of the few Members of the House over whom I can claim seniority in length of service. Like many or your Lordships, I knew his father well and admired his contribution to this House (in which he was held in considerable affection) and to the Government. I am sure that if his father could have heard my noble friend's speech today, he would have been justly proud of a considerable performance. I am sure that over the years my noble friend will prove himself a worthy successor to his father.

I am not quite sure whether the Chief Whip and I would be too keen about this cross-fertilisation between Scottish and English business. If, of course, it were to mean that the Scots were to take an example occasionally and learn some brevity, we should welcome that; but if, on the other hand, it were to go the other way, I really do not know to where your Lordships' House would get.

I am most grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, for what he said about my noble friends. I am not so sure whether I am quite so grateful to him for what he said about the gracious Speech, and nor is there any reason why I should be. He is perfectly entitled to have his views on it, and I am entitled to have mine. Perhaps I may just say this to him. I do not think that I want in this speech to reply in detail to his comments because there will be opportunities for my noble friends on the Front Bench, all in their most estimable ways—and I am extremely grateful to them for the work that they do—to answer him fully and completely, as they will answer all his Front Bench and will continue to answer them throughout the Session.

Perhaps if I committed myself to one comment of a more controversial nature, and one only, I think that I would say to the noble Lord that if the enthusiastic supporters of his party are not worried, they certainly ought to be. However, on a non-controversial note, I should like to thank the noble Lord for the way in which he has always helped me since I came to this House, always been kind to me and always been considerate in the running of the business of this House. I am particularly grateful to him for the personal support that he has given me as Leader of the House, without which no one could conceivably be the Leader of this House, if I may say so. Such support from the leaders of the other parties is crucially important to the running of the House, as I have learnt in the past year. I should also, therefore, like to thank the noble Baroness, Lady Seear, for her support during the months that she has been Leader of the Liberal Party in this House. I should similarly like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Diamond.

Perhaps I may say to the noble Baroness that it was with some interest that I learnt that she was to become the Leader of the Liberal Party in this House. She will appreciate that I have some understanding and experience of powerful ladies in politics. I realised at once that I was going to be associating with another one, and it was not long before that was confirmed. I have the greatest respect not only for the help that the noble Baroness gives me, but also for the most powerful interventions on the many subjects on which we in the House, and many other people outside, have long known her to be a considerable expert.

Looking back over my first Session as Leader of the House, and indeed, of course, as a Member of the House, I am most conscious of the kindness which I have received from noble Lords in all parts of the House. That is not to say that your Lordships have always made life easy for me so far as the Government's legislation is concerned. I have had to get used to defeats in the Division Lobbies. That is something which I cannot pretend to enjoy at the time. It is something which, having been for a long time a Chief Whip in another place, always in Opposition, I have not had to endure because I was always seeking to defeat a Government, which is those days I practically never succeeded in doing. So this is a new experience and I realise I have to become used to it.

Looking back, perhaps I gain some comfort from the fact that I would concede on occasions that the Government may have been wrong and your Lordships may have been right. Indeed, I think I have been able to persuade my colleagues in the Government, and sometimes in another place, that that was the position—sometimes more reluctantly than others, but they understood it. In a number of cases the Government have taken steps to meet points made in this House without any Division having taken place at all. So I hope that your Lordships will feel that the Government have sought to take full account of your Lordships' views during the passage of legislation. However, I feel that your Lordships will understand me when I say that the views of this House, if they are pushed too far and too often could on occasion be resented by the elected Members of another place.

The past Session may have been dominated by legislation, but there have been several other notable events. It has been my privilege to attend the introduction of my noble friend Lord Stockton—who, I am delighted to say, hopes to make his maiden speech in your Lordships' House next Tuesday. We have also had the maiden speech of the noble Duke the Duke of Gloucester and the 100th birthday of the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell And on top of that, as my noble friend Lord Cathcart pointed out, the magnificently restored ceiling has been unveiled. Some of these occasions may shortly have a wider audience if your Lordships accept the Report of the Sound Broadcasting Committee on televising the proceedings of this House.

Perhaps I may conclude with a very brief word about the coming Session. I am afraid that the House will be kept as busy as it was in the Session which has just ended. There are several major Bills in the programme in addition to the Bill to abolish the Greater London Council and the metropolitan county councils. What I hope will help the House is that I have tried to secure a reasonable balance of Bills between the two Houses. In the course of the next few weeks, and starting tomorrow, a number of important Bills will be introduced into your Lordships' House. All this does of course mean that the House is likely to be busy early in the Session as well as later on. But I am sure your Lordships will agree that that is very much to be preferred to asking your Lordships to deal with most of the Session's programme in a few hectic weeks next summer. Lest anyone should become too optimistic on that account, I think it would be proper for me to say that I do not for one moment expect your Lordships to be noticeably inactive in June or July.

We can therefore look forward to a lively Session with a full programme. But, my Lords, I can assure you that this programme will be carried through this House with understanding and with a clear appreciation by the Government of this House's importance in our parliamentary system.

On Question, Motion agreed to, and debate adjourned accordingly until tomorrow.