§ Mr. CryerI beg to move amendment No. 684, in page 130, line 38, at end add:
'Such statutory instruments shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.".
Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this we may take amendment No. 686, in clause 181, page 132, line 45, at end insert—
'(5) Any order under subsection (3) shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.'.
§ Mr. CryerThe amendment is intended merely to clear up any possibility that powers are being granted to the Secretary of State to make regulations or orders that will be exercisable by statutory instrument without reference to the House.
There is a procedure under which Ministers can make statutory instruments that are not subject to annulment or to any affirmative procedure: they are simply made by the Ministers, who will have no further parliamentary accountability. I know that the Minister is keen to avoid that in any event, but I want to give him the opportunity to make it clear that all the orders made under the Bill will be subject to a parliamentary procedure.
Government amendment No. 423, which the House has passed, allows an affirmative order procedure for clause 79. I should like an assurance that all the powers in the Bill with which we have dealt so far will be subject to a parliamentary procedure. If they are not, I trust that the Minister will accept the reserve power proposed in the amendment.
Clause 181(4) states:
An order under subsection (3) may in particular make provision for amending, repealing or revoking (with or without savings) any provision of an Act passed before or in the same Session as this Act, or of an instrument made under an Act before the passing of this Act".I take it that that is subject to the ejusdem generis rule —that is, that although couched in general terms, it relates specifically to broadcasting legislation, and is not a wider power. The Minister is being given a very wide power, and I am not entirely happy that it is being subjected only to the negative procedure, although I am pleased to note that the Government amendment ensures parliamentary accountability through the statutory instrument procedure.The power is, in effect, one of the "Henry VIII" instruments, giving the Minister power to alter and amend primary legislation without the necessity for further legislation. I always think that that should be done by affirmative procedure, but the fact that the Government have tabled an amendment to provide for the negative procedure is at least an improvement on the provisions in the Bill.
§ Mr. MellorWe have tried to incorporate proper parliamentary procedures. The difficulty with the hon. Gentleman's blanket amendment is that, by its very nature, its effect would be indiscriminate. As I said earlier, the schedule 2 issues are plainly important, and an affirmative resolution would be appropriate for them, but 'or others we consider the negative resolution procedure appropriate. In other instances, I wonder whether any parliamentary procedure would be appropriate: for 363 instance, we will make an order under clause 38, which defines "prescribed country", which will list the states that are signatories to the Council of Europe convention and the EC directive. I doubt whether anyone would seriously want to debate that list.
I have made these changes on a number of occasions. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will send me a note of any point in the Bill that he thinks we have not got quite right. I guarantee that we shall give that the most serious consideration, because, as I have said before, any one of us who takes a Bill through Parliament should be first and foremost a parliamentarian. That is what the process is about. I should be happy to look at any note that the hon. Gentleman sent me to see whether we needed some further amendments.
§ Mr. MellorI understand that it goes a bit further, because it paves the way for some of the changes that will be made by way of secondary legislation. I should be happy to drop the hon. Gentleman a note about this, giving him a rather more learned response than I am capable of as I get into my 11th hour of listening to the debate today.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.