CLAUSE 30.—(Power to obtain information.) (Hansard, 25 June 1947)

§ Mr. Gaitskell
I beg to move, in page 44, line 34, at the end, to add: (2) Regulations made under this section shall make provision for the payment to any such body of expenses reasonably incurred by them in complying with any requirements made by or under the regulations. This new Subsection which is to be added to Clause 30 enables bodies from whom information is sought by the Minister or Secretary of State or one of the electricity boards to have expenses paid that are reasonably incurred by the bodies concerned for obtaining the information the Minister or other persons require. This is in response to a request made by the Opposition during the Committee stage.

§ Mr. J. Foster
I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary who is to check whether the expenses have been properly incurred? Am I right in assuming that the Ministry will reimburse the costs where the Minister asks for information?

§ Mr. Gaitskell
Those are both points that will have to be dealt with in the regulations. I think myself that it would be proper that the Minister should reimburse the costs, where the Minister is seeking the information, and the electricity boards, where it is the electricity boards who are seeking the information.

§ Mr. J. Foster
I would ask your guidance, Major Milner. I should have thought that that did not come under the Money Resolution. The Parliamentary Secretary has just said that the costs will have to be paid by the Minister.

§ Mr. Gaitskell
They might be.

§ Mr. Foster
The hon. Gentleman said they should be; and, obviously, if you look at the Clause, Major Milner, no other body could pay them. The Clause says that the information can be obtained if asked for by the Minister or 571 Secretary of State or any electricity board; but in no part of the Money Resolution is there any indication that the Minister should reimburse expenses to a body. The Money Resolution in paragraph (c) states a number of persons whose expenses can be reimbursed, but to none of those bodies. I should like your guidance, on a point of Order, Major Milner, whether this is in Order, as coming within the Money Resolution.

§ Mr. Gaitskell
I only want to make it plain. I am sorry about this difficulty, if there is a difficulty, because we are only doing this to meet the views of hon. Members opposite. But I should like to point out that I did not say the Ministry would necessarily pay. I did offer an expression of opinion that it might. It is perfectly plain from Clause 30 that the information may reasonably be required by any electricity board, under paragraph (b). My attention has just been drawn to the fact that in the Money Resolution at the end—

§ Mr. Foster
Yes, sub-paragraph (vi) of paragraph (c).

§ Mr. Gaitskell
It states: administrative expenses incurred by any Minister of the Crown or Government Department. I think that meets the point.

§ Mr. Foster
Clearly, it does not cover all these costs. The Amendment says the exact opposite. It says regulations may be made under the Clause to make provision— for the payment to any such body of expenses reasonably incurred by them Sub-paragraph (vi) of paragraph (c) of the Money Resolution says: the administrative expenses incurred under the said Act by any Minister of the Crown. How in the world is an expense incurred by a body under that sub-paragraph? It can only apply if this Amendment is carried. But the Money Resolution does not allow the Amendment to be put in. If the Amendment is carried, the expenses which are incurred by the Board should be payable by the Minister and then, of course, they are incurred by the Minister in that sense. But that would mean that any Money Resolution would be useless. All that a Money Resolution would need would be, at the beginning, 572 words to the effect that it shall cover any expenses incurred by the Government. One could do anything in a Bill in that way, and say that the expenses are covered by the Money Resolution. That is nonsense.

The Chairman
I am inclined to think that the Amendment is in Order, and that the Money Resolution does cover the point. In any event, I understand that the Parliamentary Secretary has given his assurance that that is so.

§ Lieut.-Colonel Elliot
I do not mind government by assurance, but I do object to finance by assurance. I should have thought that the Minister's assurance, that he would find the money, is not quite enough for the House of Commons. We know that it caused the Minister a good deal of trouble—

The Chairman
It was not the Minister's assurance that he would find the money. He assured the Committee that he was advised by competent authority that the matter was within the Money Resolution, and I accept that assurance. As far as I can see, the Money Resolution is an extremely wide one, but if on further examination it turned out that the matter was not within the Resolution, then the question would arise again and there will be an opportunity for discussion at a later stage. I think that is the only way the matter can be dealt with on the spur of the moment.

§ Lieut.-Colonel Elliot
Could you tell us, Major Milner, for our guidance, on what occasion exactly could it be dealt with when the Bill has passed from this House? Because finance is the prerogative of this House. Surely, it would be out of order for an Amendment dealing with finance to be introduced in Tiother place? Or it that some amending legislation of one kind or another would need to be introduced? I think the explanations are a little unconvincing..

§ Mr. Glenvil Hall
The right hon. and gallant Gentleman knows very well what would happen. He has, I believe, occupied the position I now have the honour to occupy. He knows—none better—that one of two things would happen. If it was outside the Money Resolution the money would not be paid, it spite of what was said in the Bill; or, the Government of the day would take the first available opportunity to put the matter 573 right by moving another Money Resolution, which this House would or would not accept.

§ Lieut.-Colonel Elliot
That is to say, amending legislation; because, of course, once the Bill is on the Statute Book the Money Resolution cannot be altered. The right hon. Gentleman says, what is quite true, that we are discussing a matter which is of some interest to both of us, as we have both occupied the position of Financial Secretary. He is saying, in the first place, that he is not able to assure us that the money would in fact be paid. The right hon. Gentleman put that as a hypothesis—

§ Mr. Shinwell
The right hon. and gallant Gentleman put that forward.

§ Lieut.-Colonel Elliot
It was the Financial Secretary's hypothesis, if I may say so? I certainly do not wish to delay the Committee.—[Interruption.]—Really, we have co-operated with the Government whole-heartedly. It would be no difficulty at all to delay the proceedings, but we are not delaying them at all. We are dealing with a financial point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Northwich (Mr. J. Foster). It is of great importance to the House of Commons that financial business should not be conducted in a slipshod manner. We have the assurance of the Minister, but that does not go the whole way. Certainly he has indicated to the Committee the steps that would have to be taken if it were found, after all, that the solution he has put for ward was not an adequate one. That is an answer to my hon. Friend, whose point was very justly taken. It is quite right for a young Member to inform himself upon these matters when the Bill is before this House for consideration.