The Parliament Act Battle
The attempt of the Government to justify the convocation of a special session of Parliament this week for the sole purpose of carrying the controversy over the House of Lords a stage further is not impressive. Mr. Morrison on Tuesday made the best case he could, but Mr. Oliver Stanley's citation of the Lord President's speech of a year ago, when he protested that it was out of the question to call Members back in September to discuss the economic crisis and other equally urgent questions, was deadly. To force on this domestic controversy without the smallest provocation at a time of such international tension is a party manoeuvre indefensible by any standards. In one way only could good be extracted from evil—if a way were genuinely sought to reopen last session's nego- tiations, which so nearly achieved an agreement, on both the con- stitution and the powers of the House of Lords. Despite the failure of men who tried honestly to succeed, the last word should not be considered to have been spoken. Either side could afford to give way on the contested three months of delaying-power which is all that separated, or still separates, the two parties (on the constitution of the Upper House complete agreement was reached). In all the argument the fact that the House of Lords in its new form would be one in which no party could count on a permanent majority, and which therefore would be no more prejudiced against the Left than against the Right, has been largely ignored. Agreement on this vital constitutional question even now would create new respect for Great Britain throughout the world. That is not a consideration which can be left out of account in next week's debate. It imposes on either party in the House the duty of going to the utmost limit of conciliation.
Previous page
