Glorious Revolution: Tercentenary Celebrations (Hansard, 14 July 1986)

§ Lord Grimond
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.
The Question was as follows: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will reconsider their proposals to celebrate the revolution of 1688.

§ The Lord President of the Council (Viscount Whitelaw)
No, my Lords. Celebrations of the Revolution of 1688 are currently being prepared by two bodies. The William and Mary Tercentenary Trust is preparing a wide programme of events to celebrate 300 years of Anglo-Dutch friendship. In Parliament, a Joint Advisory Committee of Members of your Lordships' House nominated by my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor and Members of another place nominated by Mr. Speaker are considering ways of commemorating the constitutional and parliamentary consequences of the Revolution and Bill of Rights and Claim of Right. The Government support both these initiatives.

§ Lord Grimond
My Lords, may not these celebrations appear rather provocative, particularly to Irishmen and possibly even to Catholics? Will the Government not agree that the so-called revolution of 1688 was in fact a coup d'état, carried out largely by appealing to religious bigotry, and by treachery? In a multireligious society is this the type of historical occasion which we need to go out of our way to celebrate? May I ask the Government whether they are going to promote official celebrations in Ulster?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, having spent two years in Northern Ireland I understand very well the intricacies of Irish history, and I do not propose to get involved in it either this afternoon nor during the celebrations. However, I think that three hundred years of Anglo-Dutch friendship is worth celebrating. Some of the aspects of the development of constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy which attend this event are also something which Parliament should celebrate.

§ Lord Mowbray and Stourton
My Lords, with great respect to my noble friend, this is not surely just recording Anglo-Dutch friendship. This was completely unecumenical, discriminating particularly and only against Roman Catholics. Surely my noble friend will agree that later Stuarts offered to come back to the throne, if allowed to come back with their own religion, accepting all that the constitution of 1688 offered. I wonder whether my noble friend knows that my family was not able to sit in Parliament from 1688 until the Catholic emancipation. Therefore, I find very discriminating the fact that the latter Stuarts would have accepted all but this in the 1688 constitution that my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor likes so much; and I say this without hesitation, not doubting my loyalty to the present holder of the Throne and recent Monarchs.

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, it is clear that there are aspects of this particular occasion which may not evoke the happiest memories in different places and with different people. Certainly one of these has been put right in that my noble friend is now allowed to sit in this House despite anything that might have been done on that occasion.
As for the celebrations, there are different events in our history to which it is reasonable to call attention, though they may not have been universally popular or at the time particularly helpful to everyone. However, this is an important milestone and on that basis should be celebrated.

§ Lord Glenamara
My Lords, why should we be called upon to celebrate this so-called revolution which was not by any means glorious as the history books describe it? It was a pretty squalid affair. It amounted to nothing more than the ousting of the lawful rightful King by religious prejudice. Nobody objects to celebrating 300 years of Anglo-Dutch friendship, but why should we be called upon to celebrate this squalid coup d'état?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, a large number of people thought it was appropriate, and that is why the Government are supporting the various endeavours that are being made. One has to say that those Members of your Lordships' House who do not want to celebrate need not do so.

§ Lord Annan
My Lords, will the noble Lord agree that this revolution, so far from being squalid, was a revolution which in fact established the basic liberties in our country, including not having standing armies which could be there without Parliament voting the money for them, and which established that judges could not be dismissed by the Government and that 678 they could hold office however they behaved themselves? Is that not a most important fact in the constitution?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, the last point about judges being allowed to remain however they behave themselves is quite right. The rest of what the noble Lord, Lord Annan, says is obviously correct. It shows that there are two feelings about history and the noble Lord produces one which on this occasion I am very much prepared to support.

§ The Earl of Lauderdale
My Lords, will my noble friend not agree that using the term "Anglo-Dutch" seems to exclude Scotland, no doubt deliberately? Is he saying that because he is aware that many Scots— Episcopalians, Roman Catholics and Jacobites— bitterly resented and suffered from the effects of this so-called glorious revolution?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, I have referred to the arrangements made by the William and Mary Tercentenary Trust. I understand that the advisory committee set up by my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor and Mr. Speaker intends that the celebrations should cover the revolution of 1688–89 in Scotland as well as England and Wales and the Scottish Claim of Right as well as the English Bill of Rights. The membership of the advisory committee includes the noble and learned Lord, Lord Fraser of Tullybelton, who is advising on the Scottish aspects, and the Scottish Record Office is closely involved in the plans for the Parliamentary Exhibition.

§ Lord Elwyn-Jones
My Lords, did not the setting up and creation of a constitutional monarchy and the passing of the Bill of Rights benefit Catholics no less than Protestants? Is it not therefore, if the matter is looked at in a detached and reasonable way, an occasion which ought to be celebrated even by Roman Catholics?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, as is so often the case, I am indeed grateful to the noble and learned Lord for his detached wisdom in this matter. I have thought it right so far as I was concerned all the time to keep right away from matters of religious controversy, which when answering for the Government is probably wise.

Viscount St. Davids
My Lords, ought not this day to be celebrated for at least some happy aspects? Among them there is a personal one which interests me; to whit, the day that William of Orange landed was the day when the death by hanging of my five-times-great-grandfather was suddenly cancelled.

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, there might be two views on whether that was a good thing or not.