Public Limited Companies (Scissions) (Hansard, 27 April 1981)

§ Mr. Teddy Taylor (Southend, East)
On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. May I ask whether it is in order for the House to consider this motion on a directive made by the Council of Ministers when the directive was not legally made? Article 54 of the EEC Treaty sets out clearly how EEC laws and directives can be made. As the Lords Scrutiny Committee declared in its 43rd report that this procedure had not been followed, and as the Under-Secretary of State for Trade himself confirmed in the Standing Committee on 15 April that this was so, I ask you whether it is lawful for the House to pass this motion, which is an integral part of a law-making process in which the EEC and the House take part.
When the directive has not been lawfully made, and when that opinion is shared by the Legal Affairs Committee of the European Parliament, I ask you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, whether it is in order for us to proceed with this, because it appears to me that it is rather like asking the House to carry out the Report stage of a Bill before the Committee stage has been completed.

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bernard Weatherill)
It would not be in order for the Minister to reply to what the hon. Member has said. I must be concerned that the proper procedures of this House have been followed. The House referred this document to a Standing Committee on 7 April, without a Division. The Standing Committee 626 reported on 15 April. I am required under Standing Order No. 73B(5) to put the motion tonight without any debate. If the hon. Member wishes to vote against it that is another matter, but I must put the motion without debate.

§ Mr. Tony Marlow (Northampton, North)
Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. This is a very important issue on which we are being asked to vote. The Select Committee has already told the House that it would cause great inconvenience and massive legislation. The Government have already said that it will place a massive burden upon industry—a quite unnecessary burden. The Government have brought forward amendments that have been rejected by the European Commission. The Government are now asking us to take note of something that they reject and are asking us to welcome their taking further action on something on which they do not want to take action. Would it be in order for the Minister to tell the House why the Government want us to proceed in this way?

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
I have already told the hon. Member for Southend, East (Mr. Taylor) that it would not be in order to have a debate on this matter tonight, and I have given the reasons for that. I must put the Question forthwith.