HC Deb 17 January 1967 vol 739 cc96-100

6.30 p.m.

Mr. Stodart

I beg to move Amendment No. 3, in page 4, line 4, at the end to insert subsection (5) of'.

The effect of the Amendment would be to leave out the reference to Section 1. There was a certain amount of misunderstanding in Committee, both on the first occasion and when we met again, about the way in which the Commission would fit in with the delegation of the administration of fatstock guarantees. These are divided into three.

First, under the fatstock guarantees covered by the Agriculture Act, 1957, there is the certification of stock, either live or dead. Secondly, there is the payment of subsidy. Thirdly, there are the enforcement measures to protect the guarantees from abuse. The hon. Member for Enfield, East (Mr. John Mackie) told us that certification is the only one of these which is to be fully delegated; the Commission is to play no part in the payment of subsidy and only a secondary rôle in the enforcement measures.

There is in Section 1(1) of the 1957 Act a provision for the Government to provide guaranteed prices. Subsection (2,a) provides for payments by the Minister to a board administering a marketing scheme of sums which are the difference between the guaranteed prices fixed by the Government and the receipts by the Board. Subsection (2,b) provides for payments by the Minister to producers. Subsection (2,c) provides for purchases by a Minister or the Board of produce and, in the case of purchases by the Board, for payment by the right hon. Gentleman of any trading losses.

Subsection (3) deals with prices which are to be determined by the right hon. Gentleman in the light of the annual review. Subsection (4) deals with the variation of guaranteed prices by the Minister. Subsection (6) deals with the dates which could be involved when guarantees are varied.

Subsection (5) appears to have relevance to the Commission's duties as they have been described to us, because it enables the guarantees to be applied only to certain descriptions or different guarantees to be given to different descriptions. This seems clearly to be a matter for the Commission, because this ties in with certification. So far as I can see, the other subsections of Section 1 do not. If the whole of Section 1 is imported into the Bill, we shall be doing just what we were told should not be done and bringing the Commission into payments. For that reason we have attempted to clarify and streamline the matter and confine the Commission's activities strictly to subsection (5).

Mr. Hoy

We had a comprehensive debate on this question in Committee. My hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary made a very clear statement in Committee which I shall repeat later. The Amendment would not affect the Minister's powers under Section 9(4) of the Agriculture Act, 1957, to delegate functions conferred upon him by an order under Part I of the 1957 Act. These powers are, and would remain, exactly as stated in Section 9(4) of that Act, which says: An order under this part of this Act, may provide for the delegation by the Minister of any functions (other than the function of determining guaranteed prices or factors relevant to the operation of such prices) conferred or imposed on him by the order. The Amendment would limit the duty placed on the Commission to perform those functions. It would not affect the duty to perform functions under Section 5 of the 1957 Act, but it would confine the duty to perform functions under Section 1 to those specified in subsection (5) of that Section.

I am advised that Section 1(5) of the 1957 Act merely provides that orders in relation to guaranteed prices may include particular types of provisions. It does not itself give authority to provide for guaranteed prices and it would not of itself be a sufficient reference to cover the purposes we have in mind for Clause 3 of the Bill. The arrangements relating to guaranteed prices generally are authorised by Section 1(1) of the 1957 Act and subsections (2), (5) and (6) of that Section deal only with refinements to allow suitable arrangements to be made in particular circumstances.

I therefore ask the House not to accept the Amendment. It may help if I repeat what was said by my hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary in Standing Committee about what functions we are or are not proposing to confer on the Commission in this connection. My hon. Friend said this: First, the Commission will take over certification of individual animals and carcases at live and deadweight centres. Secondly, payment of subsidy will continue to be the responsibility of the Headquarters Payments Unit of the Agricultural Departments. Thirdly, while the Commission will be responsible for ensuring that it certifies only eligible stock, general enforcement work, including investigation of fraud, will continue to be the responsibility of the Agricultural Departments."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committee A, 7th July, 1966; c. 123.] I hope that what I have said will prove acceptable and that the hon. Gentleman will consider withdrawing his Amendment.

Mr. Godber

We have listened with care to what the Joint Parliamentary Secretary has said, but we are not particularly happy about it. He has told us that the explanation is provided by the words which appear later in the Clause, namely, "delegation under section 9(4)". He says that Section 9(4) gives the power and that, even if the Amendment were accepted, the power for the delegation of these wide powers would still exist. If so, we perhaps misunderstood the matter previously, but we still invite the Government to consider whether the powers they seek to provide for the Minister to confer on the Commission are not wider than is necessary.

This is the point which we were seeking to limit. The hon. Gentleman has properly referred us to lines 10 and 11 which are specific references to Section 9(4). It is Section 9(4) which widens the power. Therefore, we ought to have directed our attention in the first place to that particular subsection.

We are seeking to limit in some degree the amount to which delegation should be made to the Commission. We can understand the need for delegation in regard to matters which we have discussed previously in Committee, but I thought that we had a clear indication then, as we have had this afternoon, that it is not the intention of Ministers to give this wider delegation. If that is so, I invite the hon. Gentleman to look at the matter again. It seems to me to be bad drafting and unnecessarily wide if the intention is to provide for powers which may never be used. Surely Ministers ought not to seek powers if they are not proposing to use them.

Everything that the Joint Parliamentary Secretary has said confirms our feeling that perhaps our Amendment is wrong in that we have not directed it to the right part of the Clause. But our intention is right. I hope that there will be further limitation here. The very fact that Ministers have had to assure hon. Members, as they did in Standing Committee, that there is no intention to go further indicates that in taking the powers they have gone unduly wide.

If we have concentrated on the wrong point, that is perhaps due to our misreading, but with the Joint Parliamentary Secretary's help we have now got our minds firmly fixed on lines 10 and 11 and I hope the hon. Gentleman will ensure that something is done in this connection in another place.

Amendment negatived.

Mr. Hoy

I beg to move Amendment No. 4, in page 4, line 18, at the end to insert: 'where accompanying an authorised officer of the Minister'. I would suggest, (Mr. Speaker, if you should agree, that it might be convenient if, with this Amendment, we took Amendment No. 21, to Clause 11, in page 13, line 33, leave out 'Commission' and insert: 'Ministry of Agriculture for Northern Ireland, and authorised officers of the Commission where accompanying an authorised officer of the appropriate Minister'. I think that hon. Members will agree that they are both on the same point.

Mr. Speaker

It is suggested that with this Amendment we take Amendment No. 21. If that proposal has the agreement of the House, so be it.

Mr. Hoy

During our debates on Clauses 3 and 11, in Standing Committee, we made it clear that we intended that the powers of entry of authorised officers of the Commission under these two Clauses should be exercised only when those officers accompanied authorised officers of the Minister. We undertook to consider whether it would be possible to amend the Bill to make this clear, and for this reason I am moving these Amendments.

These Amendments to Clauses 3 and 11 limit the powers of entry to those occasions where the Commission's authorised officer accompanies the authorised officer of the Minister. In the Amendment to Clause 11, which extends to Northern Ireland, we have included the necessary provisions for authorised officers of the Ministry there to exercise powers of entry. I hope that I have met the request which was made in Standing Committee.

Mr. Godber

I thank the Joint Parliamentary Secretary for moving this Amendment. We on this side of the House are always glad when errors of omission as well as commission are acknowledged so readily by the Government and when they come forward with an Amendment to meet a point which worried us in Committee. We think that this is a definite improvement, and are grateful to the Government.

Amendment agreed to.