HC Deb 25 May 1950 vol 475 cc2237-40
53. Mr. Boyd Carpenter

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is aware that the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments has reported to this House on the grounds that the form and purport of Statutory Instruments 435, 436 and 437, made by him and other Ministers on 23rd March, 1950, call for elucidation; and what action he proposes to take.

Mr. George Brown

My right hon. Friend considers that the form and purport of these Statutory Instruments have been sufficiently elucidated by the memorandum from his Department which the Select Committee have printed as an appendix to their Report, and he is not proposing to take any further action.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Is the Minister aware that the Select Committee reported these Orders as requiring elucidation? May I ask, after reading the memorandum to which the hon. Gentleman referred and in view of the fact that a Select Committee of this House indicated that these Orders are difficult to understand, whether it is fair to the general public that these Orders should be left in this incomprehensible form?

Mr. Brown

In the light of what is said in the appendix, I think it is clear that the details of this Order will not fall upon the general public or individual producers. If the hon. Gentleman reads the appendix he will see that that is so.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Are not these Orders part of the law of the land, and is it not a criminal offence if they are transgressed? In those circumstances is it any defence to say that the Department understands what they mean?

Mr. Brown

It is quite clear, as the hon. Gentleman will see, having read them, that the Orders merely set out to show the calculation of the average minimum price. The actual prices which producers get are set out in precise forms of shillings and pence. Therefore these Orders, which we are required by the Act to lay, deal with the almost hypothetical but necessary basis of the average weighted price. I believe that they are quite clear and that if the hon. Gentleman will read the memorandum, he will find that it makes the matter clear.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

Having read the Orders and the memorandum may I ask whether it is not a general principle that an Order which is incomprehensible to the ordinary citizen is a bad Order and bad law?

Mr. Brown

With great respect, the Orders are not incomprehensible. I doubt very much whether the hon. Gentleman has even looked at them.

Mr. E. Fletcher

Is it not a fact——

Mr. Lennox-Boyd rose

——

Mr. Speaker

I called the hon. Member for Islington East (Mr. E. Fletcher).

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

I am a little uncertain, Mr. Speaker, and I hope that what I am going to raise is a point of order. I said that I had read the Orders and the Minister directly says that I have not. What redress have I?

Mr. Speaker

That is not a point of order. I called the hon. Member for Islington East. No doubt the hon. Member for Mid-Bedfordshire (Mr. Lennox-Boyd) will get his turn in due course.

Mr. E. Fletcher

Is it not a fact that the Orders are merely a piece of machinery, and that the only person whom they bind in any way is the Minister?

Mr. Brown

That is a fact. I tried to make it clear that, as far as the individual is concerned, he is covered by the actual prices, which nobody will suggest are unfair or difficult. These Orders are the machine by which we establish the way in which the minima are fixed in advance.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Does that mean that the Parliamentary Secretary is suggesting that it does not matter whether anybody else understands these Orders or not? How are the general public, and this House, to make sure that the Minister is complying with them if they are incomprehensible?

Mr. Brown

If the hon. Member will read paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 he will find that they are all spelled out for him in words of one syllable.

Mr. Godfrey Nicholson

Is the hon. Gentleman implying that the comments of the Select Committee should have no weight whatever attached to them? [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] Surely it is making the procedure of this Select Committee derisory if their comments have no attention paid to them? Will the hon. Gentleman say whether he thinks that is right?

Mr. Brown

Attention has been paid to them. The matter has been considered. There is no way of making this formula clearer and less complicated. We have set out examples to show how the formula will work, and my right hon. Friend sees nothing further that he can do in the matter.

Mr. Nicholson

Does not the Minister think——

Sir H. Williams

On a point of order. In view of the long time taken by the Department in supplying the memorandum to the Select Committee, are you aware, Mr. Speaker, that the Report of the Select Committee reached this House after the time for praying against the Order had elapsed?

Mr. Nicholson

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the reason why the Report of the Select Committee reached the House later was that when a Report is made, an explanation has to be called for from the Ministry?

Mr. E. Fletcher

On a point of order. Is it in order for a member of a Select Committee to give evidence to the House as to the reasons why a Select Committee made a Report to the House?

Mr. Nicholson

Further to that point of order——

Mr. E. Fletcher

May I have your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, as to whether it is in order at Question Time for the Chairman or any members of the Select Com- mittee on Statutory Instruments to purport to give explanations to the House as to the reasons why the Select Committee acted in a particular instance?

Mr. Hector Hughes

Further to that point of order. Is it not a fact that this very question was raised in the last Parliament and that your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, was that it was inadvisable for any member of that Committee to ask questions or to give evidence in the House about what took place on the Committee?

Mr. Nicholson

Is it not in order, Sir, to describe to the House in general terms the procedure of a Select Committee? You are no doubt aware, Mr. Speaker, that there are often difficulties over the procedure of this Select Committee because explanations have to be demanded from the Department in question before reports are made to the House and a certain time has to elapse in those cases.

Mr. Speaker

I do not think it is correct to disclose what happens in a Select Committee like this. General principles, yes; but to disclose what happens in a confidential committee seems to be wrong. I think that was the Ruling I gave before and that had better remain the Ruling now.

Mr. Nicholson

I was giving the House the general procedure of the Select Committee, Sir, and indicating the handicap under which it is bound to labour.

Mr. Speaker

If it is procedure in general and does not disclose opinions and Debates in Committee, then I agree with it, but I do not think one ought to disclose individual actions on a Select Committee for which it has not reported here.

Mr. Nicholson

With great respect, Sir, I did not intend to do that.