HC Deb 08 April 1986 vol 95 cc38-9

As amended (in the Standing Committee), considered.

4.25 pm
Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You may recall that before the Easter recess I raised a point of order about the Bill being read today, prior to the Public Accounts Committee being able to produce its report on the control of dockyards, their operation and manpower. On Monday 10 March 1986, the PAC took evidence in relation to such matters, and in both public and private sessions matters were raised—certainly in private session—that would affect the tabling of amendments and their potential selection.

Is it not unreasonable of the Government to insist on the Report stage and Third Reading of the Bill today in the knowledge that the PAC report has not been published? Does that not represent an interference with our proceedings, and is there not an argument for suggesting that proceedings on the Bill should be suspended pending the report's publication, so as to ensure the widest and most informed debate possible?

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman knows that I am not responsible for Bills that are brought forward by the Government. I had no difficulty in selecting amendments which were submitted and which appear on the Amendment Paper.

Mr. Martin J. O'Neill (Clackmannan)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. On 11 February Standing Committee D discussed the Bill and the Minister of State said:

We have made it clear that a draft of the contract with the private contractor will be made available to the House. Many of the draft contract conditions, the 73 annexes for example, will be set out in the invitation to tender documents, of which we will make as much as possible available."—[Official Report, Standing Committee D, 11 February 1986; c. 489.] The documents were placed in the Library at 3 pm today. They are extensive, and it could be suggested that the three and a half hours that it took for them to be delivered from the Ministry of Defence was due to the fact that the clerk could not carry them more quickly. The information would have been extremely helpful to those participating in the debate. Although the Minister has been as good as his word, he has not carried out the spirit of his remarks. Will you consider that point, Mr. Speaker?

Dr. David Owen (Plymouth, Devonport)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I have just been to the Library and have examined the documents. As has been said, they are compendious. There are three volumes, which are seven or eight inches thick. There is also an extraordinarily interesting document which is relevant to this debate. I refer to the report of Fuller Peiser, on the scheduling and valuation of assets; the stage one report on Devonport dockyard, and volume two.

We are dealing with this whole question today. Are you prepared, Mr. Speaker, to urge the Government to postpone the Report stage and Third Reading? It is intolerable that we should suddenly receive such information at this late hour. Will you do your best to change the business of the House to allow these important documents to be studied and examined?

Mr. Speaker

Those are matters for the Leader of the House. I think that we must now proceed.

Forward to