§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. William Whitelaw)On 4th December last I announced to the House the Government's intention with all-party agreement to refer the question of Members' and Ministers' pay to the independent Review Body.
Accordingly that body was asked by the Government to consider what changes were desirable in the emoluments, allowances and expensese of Ministers of the Crown and Members of the House of Commons, including Mr. Speaker and other holders of remunerated offices in both Houses of Parliament, and in the relevant pension arrangements.
950 The Review Body's report, under the Chairmanship of Lord Boyle, has now been received and is being published today.
In paragraph 121 of its report the Review Body states:
We have been conscious of the declared intention of the present Government to implement our proposals unless there are clear and compelling reasons for not doing so. We have regarded this as placing on us an added responsibility to keep our recommendations for increases and improvements to the absolute minimum which we consider to be necessary. It is in our view of the highest importance that these recommendations both as they affect salaries and allowances should now be implemented as a whole and in full.The Government intend to respond to this strong expression of the Review Body by accepting the proposals of the report, subject to further discussion with the parties, and with the House authorities, regarding the detailed implementation of the proposed new allowances for Members.The Resolutions on Members' pay and allowances will be introduced to take effect from 1st January, 1972. The legislation necessary to give effect to the changes in the salaries of Ministers and other office holders will be introduced shortly so as to permit of increases from 1st April, 1972. That dealing with the new pension arrangements will be introduced as soon as possible.
§ Mr. PeartFirst, I should like on behalf of the Opposition to thank Lord Boyle for his report and also to thank him and his colleagues for the very hard work they have put in to complete their recommendations this year, and I should also like to thank the Lord President of the Council for so promptly reporting to the House. He will appreciate that we have only just received this report and naturally—as, indeed, all hon. Members would—we should like carefully to study the recommendations in the report. The right hon. Gentleman indicated that he will introduce the necessary Motions to make Lord Boyle's recommendations effective on Members' pay and allowances from 1st January, 1972. We shall also have carefully to examine the necessary legislation to give effect to the salaries of Ministers and other office holders and, of course, the new pensions arrangements. 951 I think, therefore, that at this stage it would be better to say no more.
§ Mr. WhitelawI entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman in thanking Lord Boyle and his Committee for their most thorough and comprehensive report made after a great deal of consideration of a very difficult subject.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasWill the Leader of the House congratulate Lord Boyle on what, on first reading, seems to be a most fair, reasonable and informative report? Will he also accept the congratulations of the House on his courageous decision to implement the report as a whole? Will he assure the House that the recommendations of the Select Committee on the Civil List will be given equally expeditious treatment, the more so since there is no disagreement between Government and Opposition over ends but only over means?
§ Mr. WhitelawOn my hon. Friend's first point, I would not wish myself to receive any form of congratulations from the House on what I think the whole House regards as a very difficult matter. Equally, I have said that we realise what a thorough and comprehensive job Lord Boyle has made of his consideration. Perhaps I might simply add to my hon. Friend that, however difficult the problems may be, if Lord Boyle and his Committee unanimously and independently believe, as they do, that such increases are necessary to ensure a modern and effective Parliament, then it is in the best interest of the nation as a whole for them to be carried through.
Mr. WellbellovedIn view of the disturbing facts disclosed in paragraph 10 of the report in connection with Members' outside activities, will the right hon. Gentleman consider bringing forward with his proposals to implement the Boyle Committee's report a programme for the full and compulsory disclosure of Members' outside interests and remuneration?
§ Mr. WhitelawThe report of the Committee was discussed at the time through the usual channels, and it was agreed that no further action should be taken. I am of course prepared again to discuss that matter through the usual channels.
§ Mr. LongdenWhy should junior Ministers, who are much the hardestdone-by section of the whole parliamentary population, have to wait for three months for their increase?
§ Mr. WhitelawBecause, as my hon. Friend will appreciate, legislation has to be carried through this House to give effect to such changes. I think it would be the wish of the whole House that there should be no question of backdating any increases which might be subsequently agreed.
§ Mr. ThorpeThe Leader of the House will realise that we shall want to study the report in detail, but is he aware that Lord Boyle, as a former Minister, and indeed a backbencher in this House, is uniquely placed to go into the problem of the conditions of Ministers and Members, and that the whole House will be grateful to him and his colleagues for the enormous amount of work they have put into this report?
§ Mr. WhitelawIt is right for us to appreciate that Lord Boyle had the assistance of the Review Body which is an extremely distinguished collection of men from outside, with interests in industry and throughout the community, who gave their minds independently to the problems put before them. We appreciate how much they did.
§ Mr. ChapmanAs Lord Boyle's immediate successor in this House, I hope it will not be thought inappropriate for me to add to the eulogies and to congratulate him and his Committee on the painstaking care which they took in this difficult and complex matter. Whatever the public reaction to the report may be, will my right hon. Friend use his good offices and considerable influence to try to get over to the public that a large proportion of a Member of Parliament's existing salary is used in essential and unavoidable expenses in carrying out his parliamentary duties, and that, unless those expenses can be met, the effective discharge of an M.P.'s duties is considerably impaired?
§ Mr. WhitelawIn answer to my hon. Friend, whose position I fully appreciate, I think the wisest course for the House to adopt is to hope that a wide variety of people throughout the country will read the unanimous report of Lord Boyle 953 and the independent Committee, because therein is set out a clear indication of the problems involved in membership of the House.
§ Mr. FordIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that his statement will be greeted with appreciation by the younger Members of the House, particularly the provincial Members with growing families? What machinery has the right hon. Gentleman in mind for future reviews of the situation, and will he consider making an ad hoc payment to Members who lost their seats in the last election?
§ Mr. WhitelawAs I have said, the proposals set out in the report must be for the future, and I think we must all accept that.
§ Sir R. CaryAs Chairman of the Trustees of the Members' Fund, may I thank my right hon. Friend for what he has done to bring fulfilment to this most valuable report?
§ Mr. WhitelawIn answer to my hon. Friend, whose work in this field the whole House recognises, I would point out that there are some problems in connection with the new proposals concerning pensions which will have to be very carefully worked out. That is why I have made it clear that legislation on that subject will be separate from the other legislation. Time will be needed to make sure that we get all the arrangements correct.
§ Mr. William HamiltonIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that there may be some hon. Members on this side of the House who will view with suspicion this package of Tory terms? Will he assure the House that Members of Parliament will be better off, bearing in mind that the tax position of Members of Parliament is different from that of members on the Civil List to whom the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Mr. St. John-Stevas) referred?
§ Mr. WhitelawI must admit to being a little puzzled by the hon. Gentleman's remark about this proposal being put forward on Tory terms. It was with all-party agreement, in accordance with the Bill introduced by the right hon. Member for Sowerby (Mr. Houghton), that I originally agreed that this matter should be referred to the independent Review 954 Body which was set up with the agreement of this House. I am, therefore, entitled on those two grounds to say to the hon. Gentleman that these are in no way Tory terms. In answer to the independent Review Body's report, bearing in mind what the report said about regarding it of the highest importance that these recommendations as they affect both salaries and allowances should now be implemented as a whole and in full, all I am saying is that the Government accept the proposals in the report. This surely must mean that these proposals are being put forward on the basis of an independent report. I do not think anyone in the House would regard them as being otherwise than independent. The report sets out what is believed to be right for Members of Parliament to enable them to carry out their duties properly in a modern and effective Parliament.
§ Sir D. Walker-SmithArising out of the question asked a few moments ago on the subject of Members' interests, although those of us who served on the Select Committee which looked into this subject in the last Parliament understand and have accepted that our report is not to be implemented as such, are we now to understand—and, if so, is it not for the first time—that no action of any kind is thought to be necessary or desirable in this regard?
§ Mr. WhitelawI did not mean to give that impression. If I did, I apologise to my right hon. and learned Friend. What I said was, at the time when this was considered in the last Parliament, in view of the great difficulties involved in taking action in this field, nothing was done. As I have said, I am prepared to consider again through the usual channels whether it is possible, consistent with the great difficulties, which no one knows better than my right hon. and learned Friend, to take some of the actions proposed.
§ Mr. FauldsDoes the Leader of the House realise that not all hon. Members are entirely happy about these recommendations? Some hon. Members came into the House with the conception that they were here to serve the community rather than to reap an income comparable to that of their professional and commercial colleagues in other occupations?
§ Mr. WhitelawThese are matters which can, of course, be discussed. I should like the hon. Gentleman to read carefully what Lord Boyle and his Committee have said in their report. I do not think that it will justify the assertion which the hon. Gentleman has made. It is only reasonable that Members in this House should be able properly and effectively to discharge their duties as representatives of their constituencies. That, I believe, is the basis of what Lord Boyle and his Committee put forward. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will study carefully what is said in the report before we debate the Motion.
§ Mr. KinseyFollowing the comment from the hon. Member for Smethwich (Mr. Faulds), may I also say that I rather doubt the wisdom of introducing a rise of this extent for Members of this House and question, not the report, but the strategy of the Government in introducing an increase of this amount while asking the rest of the country to take lesser pay rises? We should set an example.
§ Mr. WhitelawI must repeat, because it is very important in this context, what Lord Boyle's Committee said in paragraph 121 of its report. It had considered all the circumstances and then it said:
We have regarded this as placing on us an added responsibility to keep our recommendations for increases and improvements to the absolute minimum which we consider to be necessary. It is in our view, of the highest importance that these recommendations, both as they affect the salaries and allowances, should now be implemented as a whole and in full.That is the view of the independent Review Body set up to consider how Members of Parliament could serve their constituents in a modern Parliament. I hope that my hon. Friend will consider it.
§ Mr. SpeakerI propose to call two more hon. Members whom I have seen standing up from the beginning.
§ Mr. John MendelsonAs in recent years there has been a tendency to strengthen the Committee system and to provide staff for Committees, does the right hon. Gentleman not consider that the time has come to equip the individual Member with a research assistant so 956 that he can play his full part? The report does not go far enough in this respect. It does not equip, as is the case with the United States Congress, every hon. Member with a research assistant. Is it not time that the Government thought in that direction and brought forward additional proposals?
§ Mr. WhitelawThat question shows that I am wise to steer what would be described as a middle course. I am assailed on the one side for going too far by accepting an independent Review Body's report, and on the other for not going far enough. My position is simple. We ask a highly-skilled and important independent Review Body to review the whole circumstances. Having done so, I believe it is right, in all the circumstances, bearing in mind what it has said, to accept its proposals.
§ Mr. EnglishThe right hon. Gentleman may wish to note that in the paragraph before the one he quoted it is stated that the general rise in salaries has been 67 per cent. since we last had a rise, whereas the proposal is for a 38 per cent. increase. May I say that, contrary to some of the things said—and I can claim to be the nearest thing my back benchers have to a shop steward—I entirely accept the generosity with which the right hon. Gentleman has immediately accepted this report. I do not think it goes far enough, but I am glad that he has accepted it.
§ Mr. WhitelawI note what the hon. Gentleman says, without commenting one way or the other on the title he gives himself. I would say to him, and to others, that I believe that if we establish a precedent in this House, that if we refer something to an independent Review Body we should accept its report. That is the right way to proceed. Sometimes, some hon. Members may think that it could have gone further, while others may think it has gone too far. But if there has been an independent, comprehensive and thorough study of the whole problem, we will have done it the correct way.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. We must get on. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day.
§ Mr. WilkinsonWith the greatest respect, I gave notice that I wished to move the Adjournment of the House 957 under Standing Order No. 9. May I have your leave to do so?
§ Mr. SpeakerI am afraid that I cannot prevent the hon. Member.