HC Deb 13 November 1980 vol 992 cc644-6
Mr. English

Like my hon. Friends the Members for Edinburgh, Leith (Mr. Brown) and Fife, Central (Mr. Hamilton), I should like to draw to your attention, Mr. Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order No. 9, to a specific and important matter which should have urgent consideration, namely, the statement by Her Majesty's Government that they regard as a normal procedure the proposed use of the Contingencies Fund, without the authority of Parliament, to subsidise the British shipbuilding industry. I shall not—I am sure that you, Mr. Speaker, would rule me out of order if I did—refer to the merits or demerits of subsidising the British shipbuilding industry. I refer solely to the question how public money is spent and is authorised to be spent and the fact that the Minister stated that he was using a normal procedure.

Standing Order No. 9(4) states: In determining whether a matter is proper to be discussed Mr. Speaker shall have regard to the extent to which it concerns the administrative responsibilities of Ministers of the Crown". There is a certain ambiguity in that statement. I am sure that you, Mr. Speaker, as the protector of the rights of the House, will realise what that ambiguity is. Obviously it must be something done by the Government, otherwise we are wasting the time of the House. Equally, it may be something that is of concern to the House which should not be done by the Government without the authority of the House. I submit that this is a case in point.

Standing Order No. 9(4) goes on to state: In determining whether a matter is urgent Mr. Speaker shall have regard to the probability of the matter being brought before the House … by other means. There is no possibility of this matter being brought before the House in this Session unless you, Mr. Speaker, in your wisdom, grant this application. If you do, it will not interfere with the subsequent debate because that will be given additional time. If you do not, it is likely that the Session will end without discussion of this matter. If a debate were allowed, it would possibly fill in the time while we were waiting for any Lords messages.

The more important point is that there were reports by the Expenditure, Procedure and Public Accounts Committees in the last Parliament pointing out that the use of the Contingencies Fund in this regard is a matter of dubious legality. Since that time, the former Expenditure Committee has requested and obtained the advice of a large number of constitutional lawyers throughout the United Kingdom. I should not be telling the truth if I did not admit that, as often happens, the opinions of those lawyers were mixed. Some regarded it as permissible in law; others did not, and felt that the matter would have to be tested in the courts. That illustrates that what the Government regard as a normal procedure is regarded by half the constitutional lawyers of the United Kingdom as a totally illegal procedure.

The Contingencies Fund amounted to about £100,000 until the First World War. It was increased during the Second World War, then reduced, and subsequently increased again. I do not want to go into those details. The point at issue is that it is of dubious legality whether Her Majesty's Government, on their own authority, may spend money on a political and possibly arguable cause without seeking the approval of Parliament. The same may have been true of previous Governments, and it was said by the Public Accounts Committee that that should not have been done by a previous Government of my own party. I think that you will accept, Mr. Speaker, that I am putting forward this matter on behalf of the House of Commons as a whole and not on behalf of my own party, the Conservative Party or any other group in this House.

I submit that this is totally wrong. The rights of the House of Commons are being eroded. The day has been chosen deliberately—the last day of the Session. A junior Minister has been put up to say it. I submit that you are the last recourse, Mr. Speaker. Your granting this request is the only means whereby we can debate the issue.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member for Nottingham, West (Mr. English) gave me notice after the statement by the Minister of State, Department of Industry, that he would be seeking leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing the statement of Her Majesty's Government that they regarded it as normal to use the Contingencies Fund without the authority of Parliament.

The hon. Gentleman, who is well versed in our procedures, raised a very important question, and I listened with deep interest and concern to what he said.

However, I have to take into account many different factors, as the hon. Gentleman knows. I regret to have to tell him that I must rule that his submission does not fall within the provisions of the Standing Order and, therefore, that I cannot submit his application to the House.