HL Deb 08 November 1989 vol 512 cc717-9

3.12 p.m.

The Lord Chancellor (Lord Mackay of Clashfern)

My Lords, I beg to move that the Commons amendments be now considered—

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, before my noble and learned friend collects the voices on this Motion, may I point out the task that will fall to your Lordships if it is accepted, as no doubt it should be.

Noble Lords

Order!

Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone

My Lords, the Question must be put first.

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, the Bill, as it left your Lordships' House, went to 124 pages. A very considerable Bill. The amendments that come from another place run to 136 pages. If they are accepted —and most of them are Government sponsored or approved amendments from the other place —the Bill will be increased by at least half as much again and probably more.

This is yet another example of legislation which is excessive in quantity and defective in quality. As regards quantity, your Lordships have not only to consider this Bill but also what has happened in the spill over part of this Session. Your Lordships came back a day or more in advance of the other place and immediately met the Local Government and Housing Bill with amendments running to 146 pages. Practically all of those were Government amendments. That drew an expostulation from the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh of Haringey, which was subsequently endorsed by the noble Viscount, Lord Mountgarret, from the Government Benches. The noble Lord the Leader of the House apologised for that situation, and as always —and in some ways unfortunately —the very high respect in which he is held enabled him to get away with parliamentary murder.

In regard to the quantity, it is partly, not wholly but significantly, due to the defective quality. What is happening now and has been happening for a long time is insistence on legislating in detail in defiance of the recommendations of the Renton Committee on the preparation of legislation that general rules should be laid down. The Renton. Committee endorsed a notable memorandum by the two senior Scottish judges who said they were perfectly used to applying general rules to particular situations.

If Parliament insists on legislating for particular situations, they are bound to miss some; as one must assume some were missed in this Bill from the quantity of amendments that have been made in another place. Not only are they bound to miss some but others will arise which have not been envisaged, and the courts will not then know what Parliament meant to do in that situation.

In defiance of the Renton Committee recommendation, we have continued perforce to accept legislation trying to govern every particular situation. That is why we get an inflated Bill such as this, which will be further inflated by a whole series of amendments to be moved today. This is not the occasion to go into the situation exhaustively, and no doubt your Lordships will undertake—

Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone

My Lords, on a point of order. My noble and learned friend on the Woolsack moved that the Commons amendments should be now considered. He did so from his place two paces to the left of the Woolsack. Would it not be more appropriate if my noble and learned friend on the Cross-Benches actually allowed him to put the question before we discuss it?

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, I am sorry my noble and learned friend intervened, I had only a few words left.

The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Belstead)

My Lords, if the noble and learned Lord will forgive me, my noble and learned friend is correct. Technically the noble and learned Lord is out of order. If we have the Question put, then the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon, may conclude his remarks.

The Lord Chancellor

My Lords, the Question is that the Commons amendments be now considered.

Moved, That the Commons amendments be now considered. —(The Lord Chancellor.)

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, I am sorry if I intervened too soon. I did so on advice. I intervened at the moment I did having taken the most authoritative advice that I could find.

I only wish to add this. No doubt your Lordships will proceed on these amendments; but your Lordships have put up with a good deal in the spillover Session and on previous occasions. Is it not high time that your Lordships said, "Enough is enough"?

Lord Renton

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord for referring to the report of the committee of which I was chairman, but I do not wish to pursue that part of what he said. However, I think we should bear in mind that never in the history of Parliament —certainly since the war, and I have been in Parliament for 44 years —has either House had to consider so many hundreds of amendments as your Lordships have been asked to consider in this overspill Session. I am sorry to have to say this because I am a keen supporter of this Government and of the Prime Minister. But that is an indication that our legislative process this Session has become out of hand. I am therefore asking my noble and learned friend the Leader of the House—

Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone

My Lords, not learned; noble and intelligent, but not learned.

Lord Renton

My Lords, he reveals an intellectual distinction which enables me to say that I have no regrets about using that phrase. I believe that my noble friend the Leader of the House should now consult the Leader of another place with a view to completely overhauling our legislative process so that in a future Session we are not again confronted with a mass of amendments such as those now before the House, many of which involve important changes of policy. In the nature of things we shall not have a full opportunity to discuss them. Therefore, I hope for a favourable answer from my noble friend on that suggestion.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, I fully support what the noble and learned Lord and the noble Lord, Lord Renton, have said. I have made these points on several occasions over the past three or four years, particularly during the last two Sessions when the burden on this House has become very onerous indeed. I support the noble Lord in the representations that he makes to his noble friend.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I thank my noble friend. I have been called many things in life but never by the adjective that he was good enough to apply to me. He asked me a direct question. If the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon, does not feel that I am again getting away with parliamentary murder, may I say to him, to my noble friend and to the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition that, yes, what your Lordships have said has considerable weight in it. I shall be consulting with my right honourable friend the Leader in another place.

On Question, Motion agreed to.