HC Deb 26 August 1909 vol 9 cc2313-5

Bill to authorise the making of advances for the purpose of promoting the economic development of the United Kingdom.— [Presented by Mr. Lloyd-George.]

Sir F. BANBURY

I would like to submit that this Bill cannot be presented until a Money Resolution has been submitted. The Order of the House is that no Bill dealing with money matters can be introduced until a Money Resolution has passed through Committee of Ways and Means and been reported to the House. Where a Bill deals chiefly with other things it can be introduced and proceeded with until the Money Clause is reached. But where the Bill deals solely or chiefly with money matters it cannot be introduced until the Money Resolution has been presented and reported. The title of the Bill is the Development and Road Improvement Bill; and, according to the notice on the Paper, its object is to authorise the making of advances for the purpose of promoting the economic develop- ment of the United Kingdom. I, therefore, venture to say that this is a Money Bill, and it cannot be introduced unless founded on a Resolution in Ways and Means.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

The Bill, I understand, has been examined by the Public Bill Office, and it is a Bill of a character which can be introduced in this way, although it will require at some later stage a Money Resolution. But that Resolution is not required at this juncture. The proper title of the Bill is not that which appears on the Notice Paper. It is a "Bill to promote the economic development of the United Kingdom and the improvement of the roads therein."

Sir F. BANBURY

May I suggest this Bill cannot be introduced to-day, seeing that the title of it is different to that which appears on the Paper, and it is a title of which nobody knows anything except the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I submit that the right hon. Gentleman must withdraw this Bill and put the proper title on the Paper.

Mr. T. M. HEALY

With regard to the suggestion that this Bill has been examined by the Public Bill Office, may I ask if you have arrived at a conclusion yourself on your responsibility as Deputy-Speaker, or are we entirely dependent on officials who, however able, may not have that constitutional view which it is necessary to take?

Mr. WALTER LONG

May I respect fully submit a very serious question which is raised by the announcement which you have just made. On the Paper notice is given of the intention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to ask leave to introduce Bill which is described in particular terms. You, Sir, have just announced that the Bill is improperly described, and that it should be described in totally different terms. I ask whether a notice announcing the intention of a Member or Minister to introduce a Bill under the rules and forms of the House in particular terms holds good for a Bill which ought to be described in totally different terms?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

The question I have to decide is whether the notice of this Bill is substantially different from that handed in by the right hon. Gentleman, which was a "Bill to authorise the making of advances for the purpose of promoting the economic development of the United Kingdom." The title now handed in is, "To promote the economic development of the United Kingdom and the improvement of the roads therein." In reply to the hon. and learned Member for Louth, I have to say that this Bill has gone through the usual course. I confess I have not seen the Bill itself, but it is usual for these Bills to be examined by the Public Bill Office, and this one has been so examined on behalf of Mr. Speaker in the usual way. The matter is one within my discretion, and having looked into it in such time as I have had I have come to the conclusion that the notice of the original Bill does really cover the amended notice handed in, and therefore I shall allow it to be introduced.

Bill read the first time. (To be read the second time upon Monday next, 30th August.)