DEVELOPMENT OF INVENTIONS BILL [Lords] (Hansard, 8 May 1967)

§ Mr. Graham Page
This again is a Consolidation Bill, but there are a number of points which should be explained to the House because its effect is not entirely clear. The Bill came before the Joint Select Committee on Consolidation Bills, which was told by the Parliamentary Counsel appearing before it that the Measure consolidates law … which is not of any great interest to the public but it is, of course, of importance to the National Research Development Corporation and to the Ministry of Technology.… In fact, it consolidates three enabling statutes of the N.R.D.C. to which Parliamentary Counsel referred. It consolidates these three Statutes so as to provide the Corporation with what one might call a memorandum of articles of association, if it were a private company, and it may perhaps to that extent have been a little more informative if the title of the Bill had not been quite so wide and if it had referred to the Corporation in the same way as the Consolidation Bill we have just committed to a Committee of the whole House refers to the air corporations. This would have indicated a little better the contents of the Bill.
I wish to express my thanks for the printing with the Bill of a table of comparison. This is now of great help to us in studying the effect of a Consolidation Bill. I had better not praise it too much, as it has been of assistance to me in criticising the Bill and I might find 1011 on future occasions that it was left out just because of that. But there arise from comparisons, made with the help of the table, of comparison between Acts consolidated and the Clauses of this Bill in which they appear—

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
Order. The only Question before the House on Second Reading is whether the law should be consolidated or not.

§ Mr. Page
I submit, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that we may also refer to what is consolidated. Usually, a repeal Clause in a Consolidation Bill shows what is repealed and what one assumes is consolidated within that Bill. But it appears from the table of comparison attached to this Bill that the derivation of some of the Clauses is Statutory Instruments as well as Statutes. Perhaps I may refer to that table of comparison and, in particular, to the note against Clause 1(2) and Clause 4(1,c). Apparently certain provisions have derived from Statutory Instruments, and if that is so my question concerns whether those Statutory Instruments are spent or whether there should be a repeal of them in this Bill. If the Bill is partly derived from Statutory Instruments, should they not appear in the repeal clauses?
Closely connected with that, under the Acts consolidated, the Minister has power by Statutory Instrument to do certain things. Indeed one sees that, in the Schedule, he has power by regulation to appoint the Corporation. The saving Clause of the Bill is Clause 15(4) and (5), and these provisions keep alive Any approval, consent or direction given … under the Acts which are here consolidated. Does that include, or is it sufficient to include, Statutory Instruments which have been made under the Consolidation Acts? The words frequently used in consolidation Measures are "any instrument".

§ The Solicitor-General (Sir Dingle Foot)
Which Clause?

§ Mr. Page
I am referring to Clause 15(4), which uses in the first line the words: Any approval, consent or direction given … 1012 under the provisions of Acts consolidated by this Bill. It is because I do not recognise these words readily that I ask the hon. and learned Gentleman whether this provision keeps alive Statutory Instruments which have been made under the Acts which are now being consolidated. I query that because normally the words "any instrument" are used instead of the words Any approval, consent or direction … The Joint Select Committee amended the Bill and in its report to the House says: The Committee have made an amendment which seems to them necessary to the improvement of the form of the Bill. It did not say that the purpose was to bring the Bill into conformity with existing law. I believe, reading the report, that this is so, but in the absence of such words perhaps the hon. and learned Gentleman can assure us that the amendment made no change in the law. If it did, we should be entitled to debate it in this House but the fact that the Committee merely says that it has made an amendment and has not added the normal phrase raises some little doubt. My final question deals with the very last subsection of the Bill which reads: This Act shall come into force at the expiration of the period of one month, beginning with the day on which it is passed. I am not sure why this is necessary, or why the Act should not come into force immediately it is passed.

§ The Solicitor-General (Sir Dingle Foot)
The hon. Gentleman the Member for Crosby (Mr. Graham Page) began by criticising the title of the Bill. It may go a little wider than was necessary, having regard to the Acts which are consolidated, but the hon. Gentleman will have observed that the title, among other things, was considered by the Joint Committee, and no one raised any query there. I would suggest that this is a perfectly apt title.
He went on to refer to the table of comparisons. I do not think that he needs to be apprehensive about this. I anticipate that there will always be such a table when we are dealing with Measures of this kind. He referred to the Statutory Instruments, some of which are enumerated in the table. He asked if 1013 they should appear in the repeal Clause of the Bill. At first sight, I would not have thought so. As at present advised, I do not think that it is necessary, but this is a matter which I would be willing to consider before Committee stage.
He asked whether the last Clause keeps alive Statutory Instruments made under the repealed Acts. Again that is something which I will undertake to consider before Committee stage. As at present advised, I would have thought that one would have had to go to this Act to find the Statutory Instrument, and not to the repealed Acts. These are the points which have been raised, and with that explanation I hope that the Bill may be allowed a Second Reading.