| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord MacGregor of Pulham Market: That does not destroy my point; it might have been worse if the Bill had not had pre-legislative scrutiny. It was a complex Bill, and it was important that we had both stages.
If we have pre-legislative scrutiny for selected Bills, it will be difficult to get such Bills through in a Session. That is my first point. My second point is that the end-of-Session approach will mean that some changes will be made—governments always have to make concessions towards the end of a Session—but many amendments will go through without proper scrutiny by either House. That criticism is rightly made by objective observers outside the House.
If a government have a large majority, they can do what they like towards the tail end of a Session. There may be some exceptions to the rule, but, in general, a government can do as they like. This proposal—
Amendment No. 8, in particular—would help to allay outside criticism that we do not do our job of considering legislation properly.It is likely that, in practice, such scrutiny will be a constraint on governments. If governments carry over a large number of Bills, they will not be able to carry out a substantial programme in the second Session. If I am wrong about that, the trial will show that. I realise that only a small number of Bills will be chosen for the trial, but I hope that the trial will demonstrate that we perform our function of scrutinising legislation better. That is why I support Amendment No. 8.
Lord Strathclyde: Carry-over is the most important issue in the Procedure Committee's report. I have never been attracted to the principle of carry-over, mainly because I believe that the individual Sessions of Parliament provide a discipline on the parliamentary process and on governments and oppositions to provide for the Queen's business by a certain point. However, I recognise that the Government have an ambition to see more carry-over.
In the Leader's group, we tied the question of carry-over to the provision of pre-legislative scrutiny, which seems to be generally popular, not just in Parliament but with outside groups directly involved in or affected by particular legislation. It gives such groups an occasion to try to get things changed prior to final publication of the Bill and gives Ministers the opportunity to change their mind. I am happy, therefore, to accept the experiment.
I must take up a point about pre-legislative scrutiny made by the noble Lord, Lord Roper. The experiment will fail if we end up with a situation in which Members of another place do all the pre-legislative scrutiny and this House gets all the carry-over. I urge the noble and learned Lord the Leader of the House to say that that is not what he has in mind. If it is, he will find that the usual channels will be used, as the noble Viscount, Lord Bledisloe, said, and Bills that the Government had thought would be carried over will not be. If the noble and learned Lord can give that assurance, we should embark on the experiment.
My noble friend Lord Norton of Louth is to introduce an amendment relating to his plans for carry-over. I must say to him that, in the first instance, the approach that I suggest is a better way forward and is more likely to work in tune with another place. My noble friend's proposals may be right for Parliament as a whole, but that is not the proposition before us now.
Lord Williams of Mostyn: I cannot add anything useful to what the noble Viscount, Lord Bledisloe, and the noble Lords, Lord Roper and Lord MacGregor, offered. Therefore, in deference to the noble Earl, Lord Erroll, I do not seek to do so.
However, I shall answer the specific question raised by the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde. It is not my intention to have the pre-legislative scrutiny all, or mostly, undertaken by the House of Commons, with this Chamber receiving all, or most, of the carry-over. As the noble Lord, Lord MacGregor, said, this will not
work unless the Government behave scrupulously. This Chamber has the overall lock, which the noble Viscount, Lord Bledisloe, identified.I entirely agree with the noble Lord, Lord MacGregor. Legislation is often poorly produced and rushed in too quickly. Thereafter, unintended consequences emerge at far too late a stage; and, generally, Parliament does not do the work properly. We do it a lot better than the Commons. By way of illustration, I cast my mind back to the proceedings on the Justice (Northern Ireland) Bill just to remind myself of what happened. I had a schedule drawn up in which two devastating letters appeared alongside relevant clauses—namely, ND (never discussed). We spent much time focusing on clauses that had never been discussed in the other place.
I believe that this proposal is a genuine attempt to improve the legislative programme. The answer to the question raised by the noble Lord, Lord Elton, is that the House would, of course decide.
Lord Elton: I wonder whether the noble and learned Lord could also answer the question raised by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Donaldson, about the meaning of the reference to, "one or both Houses" in paragraph 7 of the report. Under what circumstances would the agreement be by one House, and under what circumstances would both Houses be involved? Can the noble and learned Lord say which House it would be in the former instance?
Lord Williams of Mostyn: Each House would decide as to whether it was satisfied that the pre-legislative scrutiny had been of sufficient quality to justify carry-over.
Lord Elton: I should point out that the recommendation is that one House, or both—
Viscount Bledisloe: I should tell the noble Lord that the House that can carry over a Bill is the House that has possession of the Bill at the end of the Session. I imagine that the House of Commons could now change its procedure and carry over Bills, and we could not object. The Bills that will be carried over by this Chamber are those that are lodged in this place at the end of the Session, and in respect of which we would pass a carry-over Motion. If, whatever we say about this, the House of Commons decides to carry over its Bills in future and then restart them in the next Session, say, three-quarters of the way through, we would have no objection; indeed, no power to object.
Lord Elton: I am so sorry; but, in that case, what is the meaning of the requirement for both Houses to agree?
Lord Trefgarne: My noble friend Lord Elton puts his finger on an important point, as did the noble and learned Lord, Lord Donaldson.
I am afraid that I am unconvinced by the arguments that have been advanced. It seems to me that what we are asked to accept is the panacea of legislative
scrutiny, possibly backed up by the usual channels. I believe it to be wrong for this basic and, in my view, crucial principle to be overridden by those considerations. I wish to test the opinion of the Committee.7.3 p.m.
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 5) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 43; Not-Contents, 177.
Astor, V.
Blatch, B.
Bowness, L.
Brittan of Spennithorne, L.
Burnham, L.
Carlisle of Bucklow, L.
Carnegy of Lour, B.
Chadlington, L.
Chalfont, L.
Crathorne, L.
Cumberlege, B.
Dean of Harptree, L.
Fowler, L.
Geddes, L.
Goschen, V.
Griffiths of Fforestfach, L.
Higgins, L.
Hurd of Westwell, L.
Jopling, L.
Kimball, L.
Kingsland, L.
Laird, L.
Lane of Horsell, L.
Liverpool, E.
Lyell, L.
Montrose, D.
Murton of Lindisfarne, L.
Northbrook, L.
Northesk, E.
Onslow, E.
Pearson of Rannoch, L.
Plumb, L.
Renton, L.
Roberts of Conwy, L.
Saatchi, L.
St John of Fawsley, L.
Saltoun of Abernethy, Ly. [Teller]
Shaw of Northstead, L.
Shrewsbury, E.
Soulsby of Swaffham Prior, L.
Thomas of Gwydir, L.
Trefgarne, L. [Teller]
Willoughby de Broke, L.
Acton, L.
Addington, L.
Ahmed, L.
Alderdice, L.
Alli, L.
Amos, B.
Andrews, B.
Archer of Sandwell, L.
Ashdown of Norton-sub-Hamdon, L.
Ashton of Upholland, B.
Bach, L.
Barker, B.
Barnett, L.
Bassam of Brighton, L.
Berkeley, L.
Bernstein of Craigweil, L.
Bhatia, L.
Biffen, L.
Blaker, L.
Bledisloe, V.
Boardman, L.
Borrie, L.
Brennan, L.
Brett, L.
Bridgeman, V.
Brooke of Alverthorpe, L.
Brookman, L.
Burlison, L.
Byford, B.
Campbell-Savours, L.
Carter, L.
Chandos, V.
Christopher, L.
Clark of Windermere, L.
Clarke of Hampstead, L.
Clement-Jones, L.
Clinton-Davis, L.
Colville of Culross, V.
Colwyn, L.
Cope of Berkeley, L.
Corbett of Castle Vale, L.
Craig of Radley, L.
Crawley, B.
Currie of Marylebone, L.
Darcy de Knayth, B.
David, B.
Davies of Coity, L.
Davies of Oldham, L.
Dean of Thornton-le-Fylde, B.
Dixon, L.
Donoughue, L.
Dormand of Easington, L.
Dubs, L.
Elles, B.
Elton, L.
Erroll, E.
Evans of Parkside, L.
Evans of Watford, L.
Farrington of Ribbleton, B.
Faulkner of Worcester, L.
Filkin, L.
Flather, B.
Fyfe of Fairfield, L.
Gale, B.
Gibson of Market Rasen, B.
Golding, B.
Goodhart, L.
Gordon of Strathblane, L.
Goudie, B.
Gould of Potternewton, B.
Grabiner, L.
Graham of Edmonton, L. [Teller]
Gray of Contin, L.
Greaves, L.
Greenway, L.
Grenfell, L.
Grocott, L.
Hardy of Wath, L.
Harris of Haringey, L.
Harrison, L.
Hayman, B.
Hilton of Eggardon, B.
Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, L.
Hollis of Heigham, B.
Howe of Aberavon, L.
Howells of St. Davids, B.
Hughes of Woodside, L.
Hunt of Kings Heath, L.
Islwyn, L.
Janner of Braunstone, L.
Jeger, B.
Jenkin of Roding, L.
Joffe, L.
Jones, L.
King of West Bromwich, L.
Kirkhill, L.
Lea of Crondall, L.
Linklater of Butterstone, B.
Lipsey, L.
Listowel, E.
Lockwood, B.
Lofthouse of Pontefract, L.
Macdonald of Tradeston, L.
MacGregor of Pulham Market, L.
McIntosh of Haringey, L.
McIntosh of Hudnall, B.
MacKenzie of Culkein, L.
Mackenzie of Framwellgate, L.
Mackie of Benshie, L.
McNally, L.
Maddock, B.
Marlesford, L.
Massey of Darwen, B.
Merlyn-Rees, L.
Mitchell, L.
Morgan, L.
Morris of Aberavon, L.
Mowbray and Stourton, L.
Nicholson of Winterbourne, B.
Nicol, B.
Norton of Louth, L.
O'Cathain, B.
O'Neill of Bengarve, B.
Orme, L.
Park of Monmouth, B.
Pendry, L.
Peston, L.
Pilkington of Oxenford, L.
Pitkeathley, B.
Prys-Davies, L.
Puttnam, L.
Pym, L.
Radice, L.
Ramsay of Cartvale, B.
Randall of St. Budeaux, L.
Rawlings, B.
Razzall, L.
Rendell of Babergh, B.
Renwick of Clifton, L.
Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L.
Rooker, L.
Roper, L.
Rotherwick, L.
Sainsbury of Turville, L.
Sawyer, L.
Scotland of Asthal, B.
Serota, B.
Sharp of Guildford, B.
Sharples, B.
Sheldon, L.
Simon, V.
Slim, V.
Smith of Clifton, L.
Stewartby, L.
Stone of Blackheath, L.
Strathclyde, L.
Symons of Vernham Dean, B.
Taylor of Blackburn, L.
Thomas of Walliswood, B.
Tomlinson, L.
Tordoff, L.
Trumpington, B.
Tugendhat, L.
Turnberg, L.
Turner of Camden, B.
Uddin, B.
Waddington, L.
Walker of Doncaster, L.
Walpole, L.
Warwick of Undercliffe, B.
Watson of Richmond, L. [Teller]
Whitaker, B.
Whitty, L.
Wilkins, B.
Williams of Crosby, B.
Williams of Mostyn, L. (Lord Privy Seal)
Woolmer of Leeds, L.
Resolved in the negative, and amendment disagreed to accordingly.
[Amendment No. 6 not moved.]
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page