| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Rooker: We do not have the agency now. It will effectively be operated by two Departments--mainly by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, but with a substantial input from the Department of Health.
When MAFF is in the lead on a GB-wide issue--at present, I say GB rather than UK--MAFF will pay. There will be no flow of money across the borders. In other cases, decisions will be taken separately in Scotland. It is a question of splitting up some of the areas of responsibility and policy initiative that are currently on a GB basis, so that they can be put together on a UK basis in a devolved area, and, when the appropriate time comes, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland can see what is happening to the money.
The hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire asked about the headquarters. The money for the UK headquarters, and for activities in England, will come from the vote in the House of Commons. That does not mean that--in the rather juvenile words of an Opposition Member--the English are paying for the Scots' work. Let us raise the debate to a more adult level. There must be practical considerations, because there is only one central headquarters. That is stated in the White Paper. The Philip James report, on which the whole edifice is constructed, suggested that the national headquarters should be here in central London so that the agency was not marginalised from the rest of Whitehall. Moreover, agency staff will be responsible for negotiations in Brussels, drafting legislation and other such matters.
The vote will be split up, but it will be done in the way that I have described. The work in England, in the national headquarters, will be paid for from the vote in this Parliament, while the work in other areas will be paid for from the votes of the bodies involved. It is important for there to be a degree of accountability.
The arrangement must deal with the receipts of the agency, which is why the motion is required. The agency is likely to have two types of receipt. It will have the statutory receipts from any charges made under existing legislation--no new charges--of which receipts from the Meat Hygiene Service will be the major component, because it will be a sub-agency of the Food Standards Agency. However, the agency may have other minor receipts from fees for its services--the copying of documents and, occasionally, consultancy fees for giving information to certain bodies, as arranged in one of the clauses. Those minor receipts could be other income that it receives as a result of exploiting intellectual property rights.
Under existing legislation, those receipts would normally be paid into the Consolidated Fund. There is no need for the Bill to say that explicitly, but, as some of the agency's expenditure is to be met by the devolved authorities in the way that I have explained, there has to be provision for receipts to be paid to them as appropriate.
In the case of the non-statutory receipts--intellectual property rights, fees for consultancy or copying of documents--the Bill will provide a mechanism for the Treasury, acting jointly with the devolved authorities, to determine whether sums should be paid into the Consolidated Fund, the Scottish Consolidated Fund, the Consolidated Fund of Northern Ireland or, indeed, to the National Assembly for Wales.
For the avoidance of doubt, before anyone says, "Where is the English Consolidated Fund?", I specifically listed the Consolidated Fund, which we all know and love so well--that is, this one--the Scottish Consolidated Fund, the Consolidated Fund of Northern Ireland and the National Assembly for Wales. The statement in the amendment that sums are to be paid into the Consolidated Fund means that the motion is necessary, even though, in practice, it does not alter what would happen under the Bill as presently drafted. The same arrangements will take place. It is simply because of the declaration and the reference to the Consolidated Fund that we need the motion.
Mr. Gill:
What we have just heard amounts to a reason why the Ways and Means motion has been introduced, but it does not amount to an excuse for the Government having failed to anticipate that complications would arise from devolution, which they might have thought about.
The Minister has been keen that the Bill should reach the statute book. It has been his baby. I am amazed--I think that the whole House is--that he has not delayed a little longer to get it right, rather than come back in the middle of the Committee stage with such a motion for the reason that he has given, which, I repeat, is not an excuse for the Government having got themselves into such a mess. Before he responds to that question, may I remind him that he has not yet answered the questions from several of my colleagues about the actual costs of the Bill?
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst):
Order. With so little time left, that was far too long an intervention.
Mr. Rooker:
We made it clear in the White Paper published in January 1998, in the draft Bill and in notes on clauses in January 1999--it was explicitly pointed out in the draft Bill and notes on clauses, which were scrutinised by a Special Select Committee--that the arrangements for devolution were not clear and could not be clear until much later, because the timetable had changed.
When the White Paper was drafted and published in January 1998, there was an expectation that we would be able to introduce the Bill for draft consideration last summer. That did not prove possible. In the meantime, the elections to the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly came and went and the bodies have been legitimately set up, so the action is right. We knew that there would be changes.
If hon. Members think that it is the last time that a Bill will come to the House that needs tweaking in Committee--which is what I thought the Committee stage was all about--to get it right and to take account of the new arrangements for devolution, they are living in cloud cuckoo land. It was the first occasion. There are bound to be many others, but that is the whole point of the exercise: to get it right in Committee and on Report, so that we do not give all the barristers and slick lawyers, who occasionally parade as hon. Members, the chance to earn a shilling or two.
I emphasise again that the amendment does not change anything in practice. There is no question of it providing any new way of raising any new money. I have said that several times, so it cannot be misrepeated or misquoted either in Committee in the morning or in any of the Sunday journals that follow our proceedings so closely. The amendment will simply make technical changes that are necessary not only to uphold in legislation the traditions of the House, but--although some hon. Members may not like it--to adapt to the new requirements of operating in a devolved context, which is what we must do.
As for demands for information on costs, charges and new money, with all due respect I say that the debate on this motion is not the appropriate time to debate those issues. All the figures were given in the consultation paper on the levy proposal--which we have dropped. Although there is still a need for new money, it will come from the Government. We shall not rob the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for the money--it does not have any money anyway. The decision was taken that central Government would provide the extra money.
All the moneys, other than that extra money, will be provided for in current central Government public expenditure. However, as I have tried to explain, in relation to MAFF and the Department of Health that money is sometimes expressed as Great Britain money, which--in the context of devolution, as a national United Kingdom agency will be working in a devolved sphere--must be identified.
In the morning, I shall do my best to explain to Committee members the amendment that has given rise to the motion. I invite hon. Members who are not Committee members to come to tomorrow's sitting and sit in the Public so that they might be better educated on the matter.
Question put:--
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |