ESTABLISHMENT OF A CORPORATION TO BE KNOWN AS "THE CORPORATE OFFICER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS" (Hansard, 24 February 1992)

§ Mr. Ray Powell (Ogmore)
I beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 2, line 9, at beginning insert 'Except in so far as Her Majesty may by Order in Council otherwise provide'.

§ The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means (Miss Betty Boothroyd)
With this, it will be convenient to take the following amendments: No. 2, in page 2, line 13, at end insert— '(7) A statutory instrument made in the exercise of the power conferred by subsection (6) above shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution either House of Parliament.'. No 3, in clause 2, page 2, line 44, at beginning insert `Except in so far as Her Majesty may by Order in Council otherwise provide'. No. 4 in clause 2, page 4, line 48, at end insert— '(7) A statutory instrument made in the exercise of the power conferred by subsection (6) above shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution either House of Parliament.'.

§ Mr. Powell
As Chairman of the Accommodation and Works Committee, I speak on behalf of my colleagues and, I hope, for the new generation of domestic Select Committees in welcoming the Bill.
Initially, with my characteristic Welsh suspicion of being on the receiving end of something spontaneously offered, I wondered whether the Bill was simply a manoeuvre to strengthen further the already formidable influence of the Clerk of the House. But, as I understand 783 it, the Bill seeks only to establish in the form of corporate bodies the legal representative of each House who may, among other things, acquire property and enter into contracts. As such, the Bill gives legal force to the arrangements recommended by Sir Robin Ibbs and approved by the House. All hon. Members will remember the excellent report that Sir Robin Ibbs rendered to the House, which was accepted unanimously and has since been implemented.
The amendments arise out of concern on both sides of the House that the change in the nominal ownership of the parliamentary outbuildings might result in the House being subject to planning procedures in respect of its future building projects which would not have applied if the estate had remained under the control of the Secretary of State for the Environment.
The Bill provides for the transfer of parliamentary outbuildings from the Secretary of State to one or both of the so-called corporate officers. Clauses 1(6) and 2(6) specifically provide that any property so transferred shall not be regarded as property of, or property held on behalf of, the Crown. Although the transfer of ownership and control of the outbuildings to Parliament is to be welcomed, it appears to have the side effect of making the buildings subject to a range of legislation. In the case of most of this legislation, the Accommodation and Works Committee would raise no objections.
However, the Committee is worried that the effect of the Bill could be to impose town and country planning regulations at variance with those that apply to the Palace of Westminster. For this reason, the Accommodation and Works Committee would have wished to move amendments merely to retain or restore Crown immunity to the outbuildings in respect of the town and country planning Acts alone. We have been advised, however, that such amendments to the main Bill would have been difficult, if not impossible, to draft. Instead, we have proposed amendments which would enable Crown immunity to be restored to the outbuildings in respect of special legislation. Any statutory instrument to that effect would be subject to amendment in pursuance of a resolution of either House.
The purpose of the amendments is to allow planning for phase 2 of the new parliamentary buildings to proceed as if the parliamentary outbuildings had continued to enjoy immunity as Crown property. They are designed for no other purpose, and we would not expect the additional powers included in the amendments to be used to claim immunity from other legislation.
These are minor amendments which will assist the House in proceeding with the programme to provide adequate office accommodation for all Members and their staff. They have the unanimous support of the Accommodation and Works Committee. I hope that the Government and the House will support them.