HC Deb 16 June 1981 vol 6 cc875-6 4.22 pm
Mr. John Fraser (Norwood)

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. On Thursday there will be a debate on the renewal of the multi-fibre arrangement, which affects the jobs of about 700,000 people in the textile and clothing industries. The renewal of the arrangement is undertaken not by the Government, but by the EEC countries acting together.

Commission document No. COM81/129/Final deals with EEC proposals for the renegotiation of that arrangement. The Government have that document, it has been circulated to many trade associations and yesterday it was identified in a written answer. I asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he had placed the document in the Library. I cited the document in the question. The Minister said that she was carefully considering whether the document could be released to the House.

On 1 June the Secretary of State said: Within the Community, we are currently studying draft proposals by the Commission for an outline negotiating mandate, and I hope that this will be considered by the Council of Ministers on 23 June."—[Official Report, 1 June 1981; Vol. 5, c. 637.] I raise this point of order because, first, the document, which forms the basis of Thursday's debate, has been identified by the Government in a written answer. They did so by mentioning "the document" in response to a question that I tabled about its publication.

Secondly, on 1 June the document was cited—although not identified—by the Secretary of State for Trade. Thirdly, the document forms the basis for a whole day's debate on Thursday. I understand it to be a rule that if a document is cited or quoted by a Minister it should be laid on the Table. May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to direct that the document be laid on the Table? It is perhaps even more important to do that as the whole day's debate will centre on it.

It would be an invasion of the sovereignty and rights of the House if a day's debate were devoted to a Community proposal and the essential paper was not before us and when the Government had already lost their sovereignty.

Mr. Speaker

I am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for having given me notice of his point of order—albeit this afternoon. In addition, I am grateful to him because I am more alert to the issue than I would otherwise have been. On Thursday there will be an Adjournment debate, and therefore the absence of a particular document cannot affect the orderliness of the debate. However, I shall consider the matter and reply to the hon. Gentleman's point of order tomorrow.