HC Deb 03 July 1967 vol 749 cc1399-402

Queen's Recommendation having been signified—

Motion made, and Question proposed, That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session to amend the provisions of the National Insurance Act 1965, it is expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys provided by Parliament—

  1. (a) subject to the provision made by section 85 of the said Act of 1965 for reimbursement out of the National Insurance Fund or by section 61 of the National Insurance (Industrial Injuries) Act 1965 for reimbursement out of the Industrial Injuries Fund, of any increases attributable to that Act of the present Session in the expenses of the Minister of Social Security or any other government department which are so payable under either of those sections or under the said section 61 as applied by the Industrial Injuries and Diseases (Old Cases) Act 1967;
  2. (b) of any increase in the sums payable out of such moneys under the Family Allowances Act 1965 which is attributable to any provision of that Act of the present Session authorising the said Minister by order made not later than three months after the passing of that Act of the present Session to increase family allowances in respect of any period ending before 9th April 1968.—[Mr. MacDermot.]

10.11 p.m.

Mr. John Boyd-Carpenter (Kingston-upon-Thames)

I am glad that the right hon. Lady the Minister of Social Security is still here. The Front Bench is a little overcrowded with right hon. Gentlemen, with their interest apparently in another Measure. I would like to get clear the construction which the right hon. Lady puts on paragraph (b) of the Money Resolution. She will recall that during the Second Reading debate there was a good deal of criticism of Clause 5 which, as I understand, paragraph (b) is designed to cover.

What are the Minister's intentions in respect of the scope or width of this paragraph? I appreciate that it is not for the right hon. Lady, but for the Chair, to rule what will be in order, but I think I am entitled to ask whether, in framing the Money Resolution in this way, the right hon. Lady desired to exclude the possibility of Amendments being tabled to impose a firm duty on her to introduce an Order increasing family allowances, and removing the present discretion, or, in addition, an Amendment binding her to introduce an Order increasing family allowances by no less than a specified amount?

I do not know whether the Minister has framed this Money Resolution—

Mr. Speaker

Order. It is very difficult for the right hon. Gentleman to address the House with a multitude of conversations beyond the Bar.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

As I was saying, I do not know whether the right hon. Lady has framed this Money Resolution widely so that Amendments of that sort, which plainly are of major importance, will not be ruled out under the Money Resolution, but will be debated, or whether she has drawn it so tight as to hamstring the proceedings in Committee.

This is of more than usual importance in view of the unusual nature of Clause 5, and the haste—I make no complaint of this—which the Minister is showing in getting the Bill through by taking it on Friday on the Floor of the House. It is very important that we should not part with this Money Resolution without hearing what the Minister's intentions are in respect of the point that I have raised.

The Minister of Social Security (Miss Margaret Herbison)

The right hon. Member for Kingston-upon-Thames (Mr. Boyd-Carpenter) will be aware from the number of similar Bills which he has brought before the House that whether an Amendment is in order—and this is really what he is worried about—is a matter for the Chair to determine.

Paragraph (b) relates to increases in family allowance expenditure which may be incurred if an Order increasing the rates at which the allowances are payable is made. That also is clear to the right hon. Gentleman. The terms of the Resolution restrict the authorisation of increased family allowances expenditure to the periods specified in the Bill. Any Amendment to extend beyond 8th April, 1968, the period for which a statutory instrument can be made under the Bill would therefore be out of order. Any Amendment to increase family allowances under the Bill would also be out of order.

As I tried to explain in the Second Reading debate, this is an enabling Clause. I hope that further explanations which have been asked for will be forth-coming in Committee on Friday.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved, That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session to amend the provisions of the National Insurance Act 1965, it is expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys provided by Parliament—

  1. (a) subject to the provision made by section 85 of the said Act of 1965 for reimbursement out of the National Insurance Fund or by section 61 of the National Insurance (Industrial Injuries) Act 1965 for reimbursement out of the Industrial Injuries Fund, of any increases attributable to that Act of the present Session in the expenses of the Minister of Social Security or any other government department which are so payable under either of those sections or under the said section 61 as applied by the Industrial Injuries and Diseases (Old Cases) Act 1967;
  2. (b) of any increase in the sums payable out of such moneys under the Family Allowances Act 1965 which is attributable to any provision of that Act of the present Session authorising the said Minister by order made not later than three months after the passing of that Act of the present Session to increase family allowances in respect of any period ending before 9th April 1968.