HC Deb 12 July 1973 vol 859 cc1780-2
Mr. Shore

(by Private Notice) asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's policy towards a request by the EEC Commission for a further £29 million to help finance the CAP.

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. John Davies)

I am aware that the Commission is considering the need for supplementary provision for the 1973 Community Budget but no proposal has yet been put forward.

Mr. Shore

Is it not the case that on all the Government's own estimates such a request will come before the Council of Ministers' meeting on Monday and that once the request is accepted this House will have no opportunity to deal with it but will be faced with a fait accompli? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the sums of money which have been widely reported as being part of the Commission's request—sums equal to 800 million dollars this year alone—indicate that the CAP is absolutely out of hand?

As the matter is due to come before the Council of Ministers early next week, will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House what will be the attitude of Her Majesty's Government to it? Will he take the same view as he took when the question of the butter mountain and the Russian subsidy came before them on the last occasion when they said that they had no responsibility in the matter and abstained? Will he this time exercise his proper responsibilities?

Mr. Davies

I have no advice to the effect that this matter will come before the Council of Ministers early next week.

Sir D. Walker-Smith

If and when the matter comes before the Council of Ministers, will my right hon. Friend lend his powerful support to the proposition which I have put before the European Parliament that these matters be canvassed in public in the Council of Ministers so that the consumers in the nine member States may have a close-up view of some of the anomalies and absurdities of the present workings of the common agricultural policy, which may hasten its review and revision?

Mr. Davies

The matter of procedural changes in the work of the Council of Ministers will come before the Council later this month. Issues of this kind may then be discussed. It does not seem to me that public access to at least anticipatory information is lacking.

Dame Irene Ward

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In order to get the record straight, may I ask how the right hon. Member for Stepney (Mr. Shore) obtained leave to ask a Private Notice Question if his information was not correct?

Mr. Speaker

The one question which the hon. Lady is not entitled to ask is how an hon. or right hon. Member obtains or does not obtain leave to ask a Private Notice Question.

Mr. Shore

In view of what the right hon. Gentleman has not been able to tell the House, will he guarantee that he will not agree to any such proposal until he first reports the matter to the House?

Mr. Davies

I shall await the arrival of a formal proposal before considering what action the Government should take.

Mr. Milne

When will the right hon. Gentleman cease treating the House with contempt in regard to information about the Community? On the last occasion that he addressed the House he adopted an identical tactic, thus underlining the fact that the House no longer has any authority over decisions taken in the Community and that what is now needed is a drastic review of the decision which we took on 28th October 1971.

Mr. Davies

On the contrary, I have always taken the view, since I have had to discuss these matters in the House, that the House is not only fully informed of proposals but has access to many methods of discussing them in the House. As the hon. Gentleman knows, I am never loath to discuss practical matters. However, the point raised by the right hon. Member for Stepney (Mr. Shore) was entirely hypothetical.

Sir Harmar Nicholls

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

Order. I must protect the Opposition's time. This is a Supply Day and there are two topics for debate. There are also two statements to be made.

Sir Harmar Nicholls

If it is not in order to question the acceptance of Private Notice Questions, may I ask how it is that a question which has no relevance—as we know from the answer—and which is based upon an untrue hypothesis, is accepted? When back-bench Members wish to ask a Private Notice Question they have to give a clear explanation of what is behind it. Why does not the same rule apply to Front Bench spokesmen?

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member is not entitled to go into this matter. It is a matter for my discretion. I am entrusted by the House with the power to make a decision. I decide and I do not give my reasons.

Mr. Skinner

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Will you, Mr. Speaker, take into account that on several recent occasions—including the last meeting—question time at the European Assembly has been brought to a halt because the Minister concerned was attending a function in this country? Will you ensure that this disease is not catching?

Mr. Speaker

Order. I can tell the hon. Gentleman straight away that that is not a matter for me.