HC Deb 15 July 1985 vol 83 cc26-9 3.46 pm
Mr. Gordon Wilson (Dundee, East)

I wish to;raise with you, Mr. Speaker, a point of order of which I have given you cursory preliminary notice about the Trustee Savings Banks Bill, which is due to be debated this evening. The three branches to my argument will be related to conspiracy to deceive the House, hybridity and whether the sub judice rule applies.

When the Bill was introduced, the Government White Paper stated in paragraph 4.1 that there was doubt about the ownership of the trustee savings banks. The Bill was promoted, not directly by the Government, but at the request of the trustee savings banks through their central board. It was said that the legislation was required for two reasons—to settle doubt and to create a new framework for the operation of the banks.

The Economic Secretary to the Treasury told the House earlier this year: The TSBs are not owned by their employees or depositors. Later the Economic Secretary said: There is not just uncertain ownership; there is a lack of ownership of the TSBs".—[Official Report, 14 January 1985; Vol. 71, c. 35, 70.] On the basis of the White Paper and statements by the Minister, we assumed that investigations would be made. This morning a copy of a memorial to counsel and the opinion of counsel dated April 1979 came into my hands. It was by John Murray, QC, to the trustee savings banks' central board about the status of the ownership of TSB (Scotland). I understand that the TSB central board asked for similar opinion of counsel about the status of ownership of the banks in England, Wales and the Channel Islands. I cannot say what the outcome of that will be.

The opinion was specifically requested by the TSB central board and the legislation promoted by the Government is based upon it. Counsel was asked to state: Who owns a Trustee Savings Bank and in particular:—What is the nature of the relationship between a Trustee Savings Bank and its various categories of customers?. I shall leave with you, Mr. Speaker, a copy of that statement, but since all my points are based upon the ownership issue I shall quote one more passage. When relating to legal cases, counsel said: In accordance with the general rules for Scots law of unincorporated associations therefore the assets were to be treated as the property of the members. On the following page, counsel went on——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman is really making a speech of the kind that he might make in a debate. Will he put his point of order to me?

Mr. Wilson

rose——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman kindly gave me notice that he intended to raise the matter. I have looked into it carefully and I can give him the answer.

Mr. Wilson

Considering that I intend to allege a conspiracy to deceive the House, I think it worth while to give the background to what has happened. I shall encapsulate it briefly and move on to my three points.

On page 8 of his opinion, counsel said: I may be thought to have passed too easily over the question 'who are the members'. I do not think that in Scots law this matter admits of much doubt. The members, in my opinion, are these persons who agree to associate for the relevant purposes, and this they do by depositing a sum with the bank under the relevant conditions". Further down the page, counsel says: In my opinion the members for the time being, subject to the qualifications I have mentioned earlier, own a TSB. There is one major trustee savings bank affected, and that is the one covered by the legislation.

At the very end of his opinion, on page 12, counsel says: But I cannot accept as correct the view that a depositor in dissolution is merely entitled to the return of his deposit and interest at some stipulated rate. The measure of his entitlement is related to produce, not interest, and the TSB is debarred from deriving any benefit from the deposits or produce. Counsel then adds that the provisions of the relevant Act strongly support that view.

Finally, counsel says: It would suggest that the only funds held by a TSB not falling to be handed over to the depositors on dissolution will be the 'produce' of sums deposited on a non-interest bearing basis. For the avoidance of doubt I should state that I see no reason why produce should not include 'capital' as well as `income' produce. "Produce" is a technical term in Scotland for the reserves of the Trustee Savings Bank.

Either the Trustee Savings Bank's senior trustees have sat on a legal opinion and failed to inform the Government, or the Government were informed of the legal opinion obtained in Scotland and chose to ignore the significance of it and thus mislead the House.

The former Economic Secretary to the Treasury from April 1981 to 1983 is now a director of the TSB central board.

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman is alleging certain things that the Government may or may not have done. What is the point of order for me?

Mr. Wilson

The point of order—I have already elaborated on the background—is on a matter that is dealt with in "Erskine May" on page 148 of the 1983 edition, where it says that it is an offence to mislead the House.

We have statements on record by a Minister purporting to say that there are no owners of a bank, whereas he is promoting a Bill whch seeks to give away the assets of that bank to third parties without consultation with the owners. We have been given certain information, and it is either correct or incorrect. Therefore, it is a very serious matter, particularly if we recognise that the owners of the Trustee Savings Bank——

Mr. Speaker

Order. These are all matters that are concerned with the debate on the Trustee Savings Banks Bill and with the Government. They are not matters for me. The hon. Gentleman must now put his point of order to me so that I can deal with it.

Mr. Wilson

I was doing that, Sir. I was saying that here we are dealing with a bank which is owned by working people, and the resources of which are likely to be disposed of to speculators.

The whole affair of the TSB is either a contempt of the House or a breach of privilege involving the conspiracy to which I referred. It may go further than that, beyond this House.

My second point of order relates to hybridity.

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman is going well beyond a point of order. If he considers that it is a matter of privilege and writes to me in the usual way, I shall look into it with the greatest care, as I have already fully looked into the matters concerning the Bill to which he has drawn my attention. I think that I should perhaps now rule upon it.

I have considered the point——

Mr. Wilson

rose——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman got into touch with me to put his point of order and I have looked into it very carefully. He is making the speech that he would make in the debate if he were called. I hope that he may be called.

Mr. Wilson

rose——

Mr. Speaker

Will the hon. Member put his point very succinctly, please?

Mr. Wilson

My second point of order relates to hybridity, which flows from the whole question of ownership. Until now there has been no problem in relation to this aspect in this public Bill, as the assets of all the trustee savings banks were not appropriated to some other ownership. We now find that, in Scotland at least, ownership could be with the depositors. I shall quote from "Erskine May" to assist you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

Order. Perhaps I can help the hon. Member. This is the first time he has drawn my attention to the point that the Bill might be hybrid. It is normal practice for hon. Members to give Mr. Speaker notice of possible hybridity so that he can look into that aspect. I undertake to look into this matter and to rule upon it when the House considers the Bill. I cannot deal with this aspect now.

Mr. Wilson

I shall be very grateful to you, for that ruling, Mr. Speaker. I received this opinion this morning from counsel in Edinburgh and I have only just arrived in the House. I sent a letter to you specifically to give you notice. I am grateful for your statement on that point.

May I mention one last matter? There is a question of the Bill being sub judice because of an action in court. We have information about ownership which completely changes the whole picture of legislation. I am raising this point of order because we may be in danger of perpetrating a scandal on the reputation of the House by seeking at this stage to deal with legislation that is sub judice and may be subject to subsequent inquiry.

Mr. Speaker

I have looked carefully into the matter to which the hon. Member drew my attention. I remind the House of the terms of the sub judice resolution of 23 July 1963 which is prefaced by the words subject … to the right of the House to legislate on any matter."—[Official Report, 23 July 1963; Vol. 681, c. 1417.] There cannot be any question of debate on the Lords' amendments to the Trustee Savings Banks Bill being affected by the sub judice rule.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)

The hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. Wilson) referred to hybridity. You were a Member, Mr. Speaker, when a previous occupant of the Chair had to face a similar situation with respect to the Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Bill. He had to make a study of that matter and the debate on that legislation changed dramatically because of his ruling.

The first matter raised by the hon. Member for Dundee, East concerned Lord Bruce-Gardyne and one or two others having their fingers in the pie and obviously making a killing. The second point on the ownership argument is one of which you should take account, as your predecessor did. In view of the previous decision on the Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Bill, it would be advantageous for those of us who were not made aware of this problem until the past few minutes if the debate on the Trustee Savings Banks Bill were suspended and dealt with at a later stage. You would be able to make a ruling, Mr. Speaker, and we could delve more deeply into what could be a question of fraud and conspiracy by Government Members either in this place or in the other.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member is always a great supporter of the Chair, and I am most grateful to him for his advice. I have already said that I shall look into the matter. I shall certainly do so before we consider the Bill.