§ 49. Mr. DENMANasked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the growing departmental practice of so drafting financial resolutions as unduly to limit possibilities of the amendment of a Bill in Committee; whether, in particular, he has seen the financial resolution on the Tithe Bill, which is more restrictive than the actual financial clauses of the Bill; and whether, in order to protect the House from such devices, he will issue instructions which will restore to the Commons their freedom on the Committee stage?
§ The PRIME MINISTERIn any Financial Resolution effect must be given to the vital constitutional principle, which is embodied in one of the Standing Orders of this House, that proposals for a charge upon the public revenue require the recommendation of the Crown. The Standing Order would be rendered valueless if the Crown's recommendation, as signified in, the Resolution, were in such general terms as to enable any Member of the House subsequently to initiate proposals for an increase in the charge. I am aware that in one or two recent cases there has been criticism of the length and complexity of a Financial Resolution. In the case of the Tithe Bill, the liability of the Exchequer is to depend upon a variety of closely related financial factors. Very close examination has been given to the Resolution in the light of the objections of my hon. Friend. The discussion of the Financial Resolution is, in fact, the appropriate occasion on which to raise such matters, and, with the object of allowing further time for discussion, the Resolution is not being taken to-night, but will be considered at a later date.
§ Mr. DENMANWhile thanking my right hon. Friend for his answer, which I think largely meets our objections, may I ask whether he will make it clear that 382 the purpose of the Financial Resolution is the safeguarding of the Treasury, and not the limiting of debate?
§ Mr. MICHAEL BEAUMONTIs the Prime Minister aware that it is a question whether any Amendments at all can be moved to this particular Financial Resolution, in which case, if they cannot, the Committee stage becomes a farce; will he bear in mind what I think is the fact, namely, that it has been the custom of the House, in cases where Financial Resolutions of such complexity have to be moved because of the nature of the Bill, to found the Bill on the Resolution, and not the Resolution on the Bill, taking the Financial Resolution first; and will he take steps to see that that matter is considered?
§ The PRIME MINISTERWith regard to what the hon. Member for Central Leeds (Mr. Denman) has said, I think that these points, which are points well worthy of discussion, had far better be raised on the Floor of the House. They cannot be dealt with by question and answer. In view of the complexity of this particular Resolution, and, indeed, of this particular Bill, which, as everyone knows, is one of the most complicated we have ever had, I think it would be much better to await the explanation of the Minister in charge, which can be criticised by the House as they think fit.
§ Mr. ATTLEEWill the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that, besides certain points with regard to this Financial Resolution, it is important to see that this House has a full opportunity of debating a Bill without being unduly restricted by the Financial Resolution? That has occurred on more than one occasion recently, and many people think there seems to be too great a tendency in that direction?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI see that point, but I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will recognise that in this particular Bill, complicated as it is, finance is very closely interwoven.