§ Lord. Boyd-Carpenter asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ Whether they are aware that an organisation describing itself as "Keep Sunday Special" has been circularising clerks to justices with a document embodying that organisation's view of the state of the law on Sunday trading; and whether this attempt to influence the advice given by their clerks to benches of justices is in accordance with proper legal procedures and the proper administration of justice.
The Minister of State, Home Office (Earl Ferrers)My Lords, I have no doubt that the clerks to the justices can be relied upon to deal in the appropriate way with all the correspondence which they receive.
§ Lord Boyd-CarpenterMy Lords, without speculating as to what my noble friend means by "the appropriate way", does he not take the view that for clerks to justices to be approached by an organisation behind the backs of its opponents is a rather tedious and perhaps a not very well behaved process? Would it not be better to leave clerks to justices alone? Does my noble friend's Answer also cover similar approaches to judges?
Earl FerrersMy Lords, my noble friend asks whether it would not be better to leave people alone. The sane argument might be produced to those who write to Ministers and to those who try to make political points to Ministers about subjects over which they have no control. Clerks are perfectly entitled to receive letters and people are entitled to write to clerks. It is for the clerks to conduct themselves in the most a appropriate way. I have no doubt that they will do so.
§ Lord MonsonMy Lords, given the many changes in policy over the past fortnight, can the noble Earl assure the House that the wishes of a small, vocal fundamentalist minority will no longer be allowed to prevail over the freedoms of the majority in England and Wales?
Earl FerrersMy Lords, this is, if I may use a colloquialism, an old chestnut. Many people have strong views about the opening of shops on Sunday. Until those people who have loaded interests can come to some form of accommodation it is unlikely that the Government will introduce measures into Parliament. The last time they did so Parliament refused to accept them. I can only advise my noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter to get hold of his 724 opponents, as he calls them, and discuss with them ways of getting round the problem. It is almost an abuse of parliamentary time if the Government produce proposals which are thrown out by another place.
§ Baroness Ewart-BiggsMy Lords, does the Minister not agree that it is very unfair to law abiding shops when some shops break the law by opening on Sunday? Perhaps the Minister can say what point the Government have reached in their consultations with retail workers and their representatives, shop proprietors and the consumer bodies to find some way of bringing up to date the Shops Act 1950.
Earl FerrersMy Lords, the Government are entirely content to have conversations with anyone who has a loaded interest in this matter. It is up to local authorities to make such prosecutions as they consider necessary. The law cannot be altered until agreement is reached in both Houses to alter the law. My experience at the moment is that that has not been obtainable.
§ Lord Peyton of YeovilMy Lords, will my noble friend bear in mind that abuses of parliamentary time are not altogether that infrequent?
§ Viscount BrentfordMy Lords, should not all noble Lords take the view of The Times and other newspapers that what is important at the present time is that we should all condemn the breaking of the law by whomsoever and in whatsoever context?
Earl FerrersMy Lords, the law is there to be obeyed. It should be obeyed by all law abiding citizens.
§ Lord StallardMy Lords, can the noble Earl tell us how the authorities responsible decide whom they should prosecute? All over Westminster on a Sunday one can buy anything but the authorities prosecuted Hamleys. Who makes the decision?