Scotland Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Scotland Office
Wednesday 23rd March 2016

(8 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lords amendments 2 to 62 agreed to, with Commons financial privileges waived in respect of Lords amendment 22.
William Cash Portrait Sir William Cash (Stone) (Con)
- Hansard - -

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Under section 5 of the European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993—the Maastricht Act of Parliament —there is a requirement on the Government:

“Before submitting the information required in implementing Article 103(3) of the Treaty…to report to Parliament for its approval an assessment of the medium term economic and budgetary position in relation to public investment expenditure”. [Interruption.]

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. This is a serious point of order to which I hope Members will want to attend. If they do not, they can always pursue their enthusiasms elsewhere. I want to listen to the hon. Gentleman’s point of order, as should those on the Treasury Bench.

William Cash Portrait Sir William Cash
- Hansard - -

As the Minister knows, that provision concerns convergence criteria, and stability and growth factors. The trouble is that the document we have been given, entitled, “2014-15 Convergence Programme for the United Kingdom: submitted in line with the Stability and Growth pact”, contains in pages 141 to 145 a detailed assessment of the position on welfare caps and other spending, including matters relating to disability benefits and personal independence payments, about which there has been a great deal of controversy over the past few days.

I therefore submit to you, Mr Speaker, that it is impossible for the Government to be able to submit that document, which has now been significantly changed as a result of the controversy of the past few days, and it is therefore inappropriate for them to proceed with this debate. What is your view?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his point of order, which I think I will describe as a conscientious effort at derailment of the Government’s intended programme of business. I say that not in a pejorative sense, as it is a perfectly legitimate attempt. I hope that those on the Treasury Bench, and other Government Members, are cognisant of what the hon. Gentleman has said, and that they have followed the logic of his argument and the substance of his thesis. I am not altogether sure that all expressions on ministerial faces have been entirely comprehending of his point, even though it is pretty straightforward, but my advice to the hon. Gentleman is that if at the end of the debate he is dissatisfied he will have to register that with his vote. He is saying that the terms of trade have changed, but that is often the case, and he should seek to catch my eye to develop his arguments more fully in the course of the debate.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am not sure that there is really a further point of order, but as it is the hon. Gentleman, I am minded to indulge him.

William Cash Portrait Sir William Cash
- Hansard - -

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I just wanted to mention the ministerial code. After all, it is incumbent on Ministers to give accurate information to Parliament, and I wish to register that point.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman has registered that point, although, as he will know, I am not responsible for the ministerial code. Others are, however, bound by it, and therefore have a responsibility to it. That point is on the record.