---

Column 417

the AMF had been recognised by a decree of the United Arab Emirates, it should be recognised as having a separate independent personality in the United Kingdom. It was a pretty close shave, however, and the original decision represented a failure to recognise the reality of international commercial operations. Such decisions by the courts do Britain no good as a commercial and banking centre, just as the Hammersmith and Fulham decision will be bad, in the long run, for the reputation of this country.

I do not expect the Solicitor-General to reply at any length to these matters. I merely wanted to draw attention to what I now regard as enormous anomalies in the treatment of one organisation as against another, and to ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman to undertake that these matters will now be referred to the Law Commission. They are not theoretical matters ; they often go to the heart of Britain's commercial reputation. We have acted in this case to save some people's commercial bacon, but I hope that we can have a much better system of law for foreign corporations. The Bill will not deal with the question in full, and we could well do with recommendations from the Law Commission.

7.42 pm

Mr. Bob Cryer (Bradford, South) : It looks as though the Government are rushing the Bill through because, as my hon. Friend the Member for Norwood (Mr. Fraser) said, what is at stake is a trading relationship. The Bill contains retrospective provisions. I can recall how the then Conservative Opposition treated a retrospective provision introduced to deal with the case of Clay Cross councillors who had been surcharged and faced disqualification. The Housing Finance (Special Provisions) Act 1975 simply restored those councillors' civic rights--civic rights that had already been restored to councillors in Scotland and in Wales--but because the Bill contained retrospective provisions, the Conservative Opposition said that it was an absolute and complete outrage.

Sir Michael Havers, as he then was, led the assault on a handful of brave working-class councillors who had had the temerity to provide decent housing at low rents. The previous jackboot Conservative Government had tried to force them to raise rents, but they had decided that the people they represented should be entitled to low rents. Because of the Clay Cross councillors' principled stand, they were surcharged and disqualified. When we attempted to introduce a Bill to deal with the matter, we had an enormous row about retrospective legislation.

I take the view that retrospective legislation is sometimes necessary. But the Government should recognise that, on their own previous criteria, a Bill containing retrospective provisions should be dealt with very charily by the House. I remember Dick Crawshaw, who was ostensibly a Labour Member, but who shortly afterwards joined the newly formed SDP, saying of the Bill that retrospective legislation was the top of the slippery slope to fascism --such was the tumult--

Mr. Alan Meale (Mansfield) : Where is he now?

Mr. Cryer : He is dead, as a matter of fact.

I caution the Government about rushing the Bill through. I assume that all its stages are to be dealt with in a matter of minutes. If we are to maintain the standards set in 1975 by the man who became Attorney-General in a

---

Column 418

Conservative Government and who said that retrospective legislation should not be applied, we should consider the Bill carefully and take some time over it.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Norwood so cogently argued, if there is pressure from the City or from a commercial trading organisation, the Government whip through Bills which contain loopholes, just to satisfy those people. But when it comes to the ordinary workers and a decent little urban district council trying to establish standards and provide good quality, low-rent housing, it is a different story.

The Clay Cross councillors did not actually disobey the legislation introduced by the previous Conservative Government. They asked for a commissioner to be sent in, and that Government refused. As a consequence of the Government's refusal, they faced penalties. I repeat that the Conservative party opposed that legislation because of its retrospective elements. There seems to be a strong sniff of double standards weaving its way around the House tonight. 7.46 pm

The Solicitor-General : With the leave of the House, Madam Deputy Speaker. We have had useful contributions to this short debate. First, the matter of retrospection has been raised. As the hon. Member for Norwood (Mr. Fraser) rightly said, this is a case in which the retrospective elements are wholly acceptable. It is a matter for the Law Officers, in that independent capacity, to look at retrospection, and one of the criteria on the basis of which one accepts retrospection--Law Officers appointed by Governments of all complexions on behalf of the Crown have always accepted it--is where what is involved is the restoration of the law to the state in which everyone believed it to have been and on the basis of which everyone had acted in commercial dealings. That is a wholly acceptable form of retrospective legislation.

The hon. Member for Norwood raised other aspects of the Bill, and mentioned what he described as unanswered questions and anomalies. He then linked those to the Arab Monetary Fund case. Some fairly remarkable arguments were advanced on behalf of those who sought to avoid financial liability in that case. It is an arcane area of the law, and those arguments found favour in the Court of Appeal. They did not, however, find favour in the House of Lords, and the House of Lords, adopting principles that are wholly consistent with the Bill, which states the matter clearly for the world in general, put the matter right. In so far as it is right for me to express an opinion on these difficult matters, I believe that the arguments that found favour in the House of Lords had a great deal of common sense to recommend them, as well as being the law of the land as held by our highest court.

I do not think that the hon. Member for Norwood would expect me to give an undertaking in quite the form in which he asked for it. He asked for an undertaking that the Lord Chancellor will ask the Law Commission to look at the matters that he described as anomalies. Nevertheless, I shall refer his careful remarks to my noble and learned Friend, so that he may consider them. Obviously, I cannot give an undertaking on behalf of my noble and learned Friend, and perhaps, on reflection, it will anyway become clearer that what are thought to be anomalies are not so anomalous and that questions that are thought to have been unanswered in fact have sensible

---

Column 419

answers. We will reflect on the points that the hon. Gentleman made when we have the opportunity to study them in print. I hope that that will satisfy him. I shall either write to him or ask my noble and learned Friend to write to him, so that these matters are not merely left in the air.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Question put, That the Bill be now read a Second time :-- The House divided : Ayes 178, Noes 26.

Division No. 218] [7.48 pm

AYES

Alison, Rt Hon Michael

Allason, Rupert

Amess, David

Amos, Alan

Arbuthnot, James

Ashby, David

Ashdown, Rt Hon Paddy

Atkins, Robert

Atkinson, David

Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley)

Banks, Robert (Harrogate)

Beaumont-Dark, Anthony

Beggs, Roy

Bellingham, Henry

Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke)

Benyon, W.

Bevan, David Gilroy

Blackburn, Dr John G.

Blaker, Rt Hon Sir Peter

Boswell, Tim

Bowis, John

Brazier, Julian

Brooke, Rt Hon Peter

Brown, Michael (Brigg & Cl't's)

Budgen, Nicholas

Burt, Alistair

Butler, Chris

Carlile, Alex (Mont'g)

Carlisle, John, (Luton N)

Carttiss, Michael

Cash, William

Channon, Rt Hon Paul

Chapman, Sydney

Clark, Rt Hon Sir William

Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)

Conway, Derek

Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)

Coombs, Simon (Swindon)

Cormack, Patrick

Couchman, James

Currie, Mrs Edwina

Davis, David (Boothferry)

Dicks, Terry

Durant, Sir Anthony

Dykes, Hugh

Emery, Sir Peter

Favell, Tony

Fenner, Dame Peggy

Fishburn, John Dudley

Fookes, Dame Janet

Forman, Nigel

Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)

Forth, Eric

Fox, Sir Marcus

Franks, Cecil

Freeman, Roger

French, Douglas

Fry, Peter

Gale, Roger

Goodhart, Sir Philip

Goodlad, Alastair

Gorst, John

Greenway, John (Ryedale)

Gregory, Conal

Griffiths, Sir Eldon (Bury St E')

Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)

Grylls, Michael

Gummer, Rt Hon John Selwyn

Hague, William

Hampson, Dr Keith

Hanley, Jeremy

Hargreaves, Ken (Hyndburn)

Harris, David

Haselhurst, Alan

Hawkins, Christopher

Hayes, Jerry

Hayward, Robert

Heathcoat-Amory, David

Hill, James

Hind, Kenneth

Howarth, G. (Cannock & B'wd)

Howell, Ralph (North Norfolk)

Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W)

Hughes, Simon (Southwark)

Irvine, Michael

Jack, Michael

Janman, Tim

Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)

Jones, Robert B (Herts W)

Kilfedder, James

King, Roger (B'ham N'thfield)

Kirkhope, Timothy

Knapman, Roger

Knight, Greg (Derby North)

Knowles, Michael

Knox, David

Lang, Rt Hon Ian

Latham, Michael

Lee, John (Pendle)

Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark

Lester, Jim (Broxtowe)

Livsey, Richard

Lord, Michael

Luce, Rt Hon Sir Richard

Lyell, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas

Maclean, David

Maclennan, Robert

McLoughlin, Patrick

McNair-Wilson, Sir Michael

Malins, Humfrey

Mans, Keith

Marland, Paul

Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin

Meyer, Sir Anthony

Miscampbell, Norman

Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)

Molyneaux, Rt Hon James

Monro, Sir Hector

Moss, Malcolm

Neale, Sir Gerrard

Neubert, Sir Michael

Nicholls, Patrick

Norris, Steve

Oppenheim, Phillip

Page, Richard

Paice, James

---