---

The Second Deputy Chairman : Order. I also expect gentlemanly conduct. The hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Wallace) knows full well that, if the hon. Member who has the Floor does not give way, he must resume his seat.

Mr. Peter Lloyd : I shall respond briefly to specific points and not to the general arguments, against which you have warned us sternly, Dame Janet, especially as the latter have been aired several times in previous debates.

The hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler) made three points. First, the future shape of the Cornish Euro-constituency and every other Euro-seat is entirely a matter for the independent boundary committees, not for

---

Column 403

me. The committees will have to follow the criteria of the European Parliamentary Elections Act 1978, which the hon. Gentleman related. Let me repeat them for greater clarity : the Boundary Commission and the boundary committees, under the same rules, must produce Euro-constituencies which consist of a minimum of two parliamentary constituencies. There must be no overlap between parliamentary constituencies, and the Euro-constituency must be as near as possible to the quota, which means that it must be as near as is reasonably practicable having regard, where appropriate, to the special geographical considerations of the region. Under those criteria, it is entirely a matter for the independent committees.

Secondly, the committees are not of course subject to the parliamentary commissioner but, like every other public body, they are liable to challenge in the courts. Only the order approved by both Houses is exempt from such a challenge, which is standard Boundary Commission legislation. I think that the hon. Gentleman will accept that it has been right in the past, and it is right now.

Mr. Tyler : The Minister is now admitting that the announcement, the fiats of the so-called independent committees, can be open to challenge in the courts, or judicial review. Does he therefore accept that there could be substantial delays when it is found that there will be no democratic base for open discussion and debate at a public inquiry for the fiats?

Mr. Lloyd : I am not admitting anything ; I am telling the hon. Gentleman what is perfectly clear from a cursory reading of the Bill. Like any other public body or institution, the committees are open to review by the courts. The only things that are not are orders passed by the two Houses.

Mr. Wallace : The Minister mentions orders of the House, but is he satisfied that such orders are not subject to the courts if they contravene the treaties and therefore may not be in accordance with European Community law? Is he satisfied that any legislation passed by the House can override European Community law?

Mr. Lloyd : Great care is taken to ensure that any legislation passed by this House is on all fours with European Community law and with our obligations.

Mr. Wallace : The Minister is surely aware of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988, which sought to deal with ships flying flags of convenience. Spanish vessels were taking British quotas and flying the British flag but they were essentially Spanish vessels. The Act was oof the 1988 Act. Can the Minister guarantee that what we are passing tonight will not be overturned by a subsequent ruling of the European Court?

Mr. Lloyd : I am certain that what we are passing tonight--and I am glad that the hon. Gentleman accepts that we are passing it--is on all fours with the law and our obligations and will not be overturned by any court.

I deal now with the third issue raised by the hon. Member for North Cornwall. After redrawing the

---

Column 404

parliamentary boundaries, the Boundary Commission will have to review the Euro-boundaries in the usual way. The Boundary Commission is properly required by statute to review Euro- boundaries after every general review of parliamentary boundaries. Not to do so would leave us with the real problems of overlap about which several hon. Members have complained.

The hon. Member for Ashfield (Mr. Hoon) drew my attention to clause 2(6). The intention is to enable the committees to start work straight away. Amendment No. 23, for which the hon. Gentleman voted, was posited on the assumption that the committees would start work almost immediately and, in order for them to start immediately, that subsection must be included. The timetable mentioned by the hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) relies on the committees starting work straight away, but the hon. Gentleman wanted to wait until after Royal Assent, which may not be granted until the spillover period, thereby losing two or three months in which the committees could be working and hearing the representations that people will undoubtedly make on its provisional recommendations which we hope will be ready by the beginning of August. They could not possibly be ready by the middle of August if we were to accept the suggestion to remove clause 2(6).

Mr. Hoon : The Minister says that he wants the committees to start work immediately, but does he mean tomorrow or next week? When are the appointees going to take up their posts--or have they already started their work?

Mr. Lloyd : Of course they have not started their work, because we shall not appoint them until we have consulted leaders of Opposition parties. We have said that we are trying to secure the services of members of the Boundary Commission. We have gone a long way towards achieving that.

Mr. Don Foster (Bath) : Will the Minister give way on that point?

Mr. Lloyd : No, I shall not give way on that point, because I have made it perfectly clear.

Mr. Foster : Will the Minister give way on the matter of consultation?

Mr. Lloyd : Very well, I give way on that matter.

Mr. Foster : I understood the Minister to say that no decision about membership would be made until there had been consultation with leaders of Opposition parties. Will he assure me that my right hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) will be consulted before any decisions are made?

Mr. Lloyd : I have met representatives of the Liberal party to discuss our approach. If the leader of the Liberal party would like to be party to our conversations he can. Consultation is intended to make known the names of those whom we are considering appointing, and we shall of course do that before final letters of appointment are sent. I have understood from all the parties that if the committees are to be set up-- whether or not they like the idea of

committees--members of the Boundary Commission are the most suitable people to appoint.

Mr. Allen : Will the Minister give way?

---

Column 405

Mr. Lloyd : Very briefly.

Mr. Allen : The Minister is currently going through the consultation process on the membership of the committees. Equally, the work programme timetable laid out by his Department will roll on until and including Royal Assent. I am sure that the Minister would not wish anyone to get the impression that people are waiting until Royal Assent to start work. I raise that point only to make matters absolutely clear for the benefit of their Lordships, who will be aware that work will be going on as they debate the issue.

Mr. Lloyd : Yes, I have made that fact clear already, and amendment No. 23, which the hon. Gentleman supported, assumed that that would happen. That is why it was absurd for the right hon. Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Sir D. Steel) to say that this was the worst example of retrospective legislation that he had seen. The legislation is not retrospective at all in any normal meaning of that term--that is, it does not change the legality of a past action. The provision merely confirms that the current absence of the legislation from the statute book cannot be used later to argue that something perfectly valid that the committee does now became invalid when the Bill was enacted. That is the reverse of restrospective legislation, which is a particular reason, among the others that I have explained, why the House should allow clause 2 to stand part of the Bill. Question put, That the clause stand part of the Bill : The Committee divided : Ayes 220, Noes 34.

Division No.324] [8.59 pm

AYES

Alexander, Richard

Alison, Rt Hon Michael (Selby)

Amess, David

Ancram, Michael

Arbuthnot, James

Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)

Arnold, Sir Thomas (Hazel Grv)

Aspinwall, Jack

Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)

Baker, Nicholas (Dorset North)

Baldry, Tony

Bates, Michael

Beggs, Roy

Bellingham, Henry

Biffen, Rt Hon John

Blackburn, Dr John G.

Bonsor, Sir Nicholas

Booth, Hartley

Bottomley, Rt Hon Virginia

Bowden, Andrew

Bowis, John

Brandreth, Gyles

Brazier, Julian

Bright, Graham

Brooke, Rt Hon Peter

Brown, M. (Brigg & Cl'thorpes)

Browning, Mrs. Angela

Burns, Simon

Burt, Alistair

Butterfill, John

Carlisle, John (Luton North)

Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)

Carrington, Matthew

Carttiss, Michael

Channon, Rt Hon Paul

Chapman, Sydney

Coe, Sebastian

Colvin, Michael

Congdon, David

Coombs, Anthony (Wyre For'st)

Cope, Rt Hon Sir John

Cormack, Patrick

Couchman, James

Cran, James

Currie, Mrs Edwina (S D'by'ire)

Davies, Quentin (Stamford)

Davis, David (Boothferry)

Day, Stephen

Deva, Nirj Joseph

Devlin, Tim

Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James

Dover, Den

Duncan, Alan

Duncan-Smith, Iain

Dunn, Bob

Dykes, Hugh

Evans, David (Welwyn Hatfield)

Evans, Jonathan (Brecon)

Evans, Roger (Monmouth)

Evennett, David

Faber, David

Fabricant, Michael

Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)

Forman, Nigel

Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)

Forsythe, Clifford (Antrim S)

Fox, Dr Liam (Woodspring)

Fox, Sir Marcus (Shipley)

Freeman, Rt Hon Roger

Fry, Peter

Gale, Roger

Gallie, Phil

Gardiner, Sir George

Gillan, Cheryl

Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles

Gorman, Mrs Teresa

Gorst, John

Grant, Sir Anthony (Cambs SW)

Greenway, John (Ryedale)

Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth, N)

---