asked the Lord President of the Council what is his policy towards the setting up of a Select or Joint Committee on private business procedure.

I believe that an inquiry into this subject is probably due, but I am not sure that it would be appropriate to undertake such a commitment this Session. If such an inquiry were set up, the Government's view is that it might be appropriate that it should be undertaken by a Joint Committee of both Houses.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that answer. Does he appreciate that the present system is hopelessly antiquated and bears heavily on people who have to make objections to Private Bills? If the Government are unable to announce the appointment of a Joint or Select Committee, will they refer the matter forthwith to the Procedure Committee?

On the last part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, this matter would not be within the normal terms of reference of the Procedure Committee. But, as I have said, a joint review of this matter might be useful. I agree with what my hon. Friend said in the earlier part of his supplementary question.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is essential that Parliament should retain the right of full scrutiny of all private measures? Does he also agree that one area of private business which is well overdue for review is the fees that are charged, which I understand have not been reviewed for the past 50 to 60 years?

I will consider the latter part of what the hon. Gentleman has said. On the first part, scrutiny, yes; obstruction, no.

If my right hon. Friend refers this matter to a Joint Committee of the two Houses, will he include in the terms of reference the matter of reporting on the circumstances in which Ministers should or should not intervene in proceedings on Private Bills in this House?

Yes, Sir. I should be quite happy for that to be part of the terms of reference and, in view of what my hon. Friend has said to me on previous occasions, I should ensure that it was.