| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Dubs: I want to be as helpful as I am able to be. The reference to Parliament Buildings simply excludes the Secretary of State from making a request. It does not imply that the commission's writ is limited to Parliament Buildings. The commission is charged under Clause 22(4) with providing the property or services required by the Assembly. I hope that that goes some way towards helping the noble Lord.
Lord Alderdice: The noble Lord's comment is extremely helpful because it opens up possibilities which we may be able to explore at a fairly early stage. He has opened up an extremely helpful door. We may be able to explore that with his colleagues and achieve a resolution which is satisfactory to us all. With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
6.15 p.m.
Clause 46 [Payments out of Fund without appropriation Act]:
Lord Dubs moved Amendment No. 117:
The noble Lord said: The aim of our financial provisions is to continue the tried and tested methods which have been in place now for more than 70 years.
The government amendments which I am moving are mostly technical. Amendments Nos. 117 to 122 tidy up Clause 46 which is designed, first, to enable the financing of public services to continue if the Assembly is unable to agree a budget by the end of the financial year; and, secondly, to encourage it to agree by the prospect of a substantial cut in the amount of money available for public services. There is a risk that the Assembly might not agree because the budget, in accordance with the terms of the agreement, is subject to a cross-community vote. I hope it is not a big risk. I am sure the Assembly will take its financial responsibilities very seriously. But it is a risk with this sort of voting and we need to make provision.
The noble Lords, Lord Cope of Berkeley and Lord Molyneaux of Killead, also address that contingency in Amendment No. 127 where they propose that the Secretary of State should fix the budget if the Assembly cannot do so before the end of the financial year. But I believe that their solution is wrong in principle because it would involve the Secretary of State in devolved matters which are not her responsibility and would provide an easy way out of an impasse for some members of the Assembly.
The default provision provided in the Bill, as amended, would enable the Department of Finance and Personnel to authorise up to 75 per cent. of the previous year's budget from the start of the financial year to keep public services running. If the Assembly still had not reached a decision by July, the Department of Finance and Personnel could authorise the expenditure of additional sums up to a total over the whole period from the start of the financial year of 95 per cent. of the previous year's budget. That cut in the amount of money available for public expenditure on default would act as an incentive to members of the Assembly to agree a budget on time while providing protection for essential services.
In Amendments Nos. 119A and 121A the noble Lord, Lord Cope, suggests that we should reduce the sums of money available to the Department of Finance and Personnel to 50 per cent. at the start of the financial year and 75 per cent. for the whole year. That would certainly be an even stronger incentive to the Assembly to agree a budget than our proposals. But I think ours are strong enough. The noble Lord's proposal would present a grave risk to the people of Northern Ireland if the Assembly were not to agree. I beg to move.
Lord Cope of Berkeley: As the Minister said, I have tabled several amendments which are designed to make it more difficult for the Assembly if it does not agree a budget and hence to put pressure on it to agree a budget.
The Minister suggested that my proposal in Amendment No. 127 would be an easy way out; that is, giving permission for the Secretary of State to take over the budget if the Assembly fails to agree one. I had hoped that it would be difficult for the Assembly to give up its own powers, particularly over finance, to the Secretary of State. But I suppose that it could work either way.
At one stage I had some experience, which is not irrelevant, when I had responsibility at the Treasury for agreeing the Community budget during the British presidency. We had an awful job to achieve agreement among all the necessary parties by 31st December. It is therefore within my knowledge that the European Union has a device whereby if it fails to agree, one-twelfth of the previous year's allocation can be released each month as time goes on. That obviously provides considerable difficulties for the administration and hence it is extremely keen to avoid that happening. However, it has happened in quite a number of years. We avoided it happening in the year that I was in charge of those matters. I would like the Committee to think that that was entirely due to my skill and ability but I had some luck on my side. Therefore, I succeeded, but not everybody has managed that.
It seems to me that 75 per cent. and 95 per cent. are very high and not much of a penalty. It is not a penalty which would bite very quickly. I believe that 75 per cent. is nothing of a penalty to apply between March and July. I should imagine that they would have an awful job to get through 75 per cent. of last year's money in that period of time, and even 50 per cent. is not a very sharp instrument in that respect. Ninety-five per cent. for a whole year is of course a considerable incentive. A reduction of 5 per cent. is not easily obtained in public expenditure, but it does not apply for much of the year. I also suggest tightening that up, but I do not feel all that strongly about these issues. It is important that there should be a mechanism, and that it is provided in the Bill. I should like to see it a little stronger so as to encourage the Assembly to come to an agreement. However, unless I am encouraged by subsequent debate, I do not think that I shall be pressing the three amendments very hard.
Lord Holme of Cheltenham: I think that the eventuality with which the government amendments and those of the noble Lord, Lord Cope, seek to deal is by no means unlikely. We could be faced with precisely this eventuality, so we are not talking about an academic problem but about a real problem resulting from the Assembly not having the political maturity to deal with its responsibilities properly. It is a possibility. We hope it is not a likelihood; but it is a possibility. I have to say that between the two ways of dealing with it I was glad to hear the noble Lord, Lord Cope, say that he was not too dogmatic about them. I quite take his point that the Government's penalties are not "front loaded" as it were, and in that sense do not act as a sufficient deterrent. However, given the choice between his
Lord Dubs: I thank the noble Lord, Lord Holme, for his support. I should like to say to the noble Lord, Lord Cope, that a reduction of 75 per cent., which he suggested would not have that much impact for quite some time, could in fact bite fairly quickly, because the Assembly would very soon find that the departments in Northern Ireland were developing serious cash-flow problems; indeed, they might develop those problems within a month or two. So I think that it is a tougher sanction than perhaps the noble Lord suggested.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Dubs moved Amendment No. 118:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Dubs moved Amendment No. 119:
[Amendment No. 119A, as an amendment to Amendment No. 119, not moved.]
On Question, Amendment No. 119 agreed to.
Lord Dubs moved Amendment No. 120:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Dubs moved Amendment No. 121:
[Amendment No. 121A, as an amendment to Amendment No. 121, not moved.]
On Question, Amendment No. 121 agreed to.
Lord Dubs moved Amendment No. 122:
Page 23, line 22, after ("three") insert ("working").
Page 23, leave out lines 26 to 29 and insert--
("(a) the authorised officer of the Department of Finance and Personnel may, subject to any Act subsequently passed, authorise the issue of sums out of that Fund for the service of year 2; and").
Page 23, line 31, at end insert--
("( ) The aggregate of the sums issued under subsection (1) for the service of year 2 shall not exceed 75 per cent of the total amount appropriated by Act for the service of year 1.").
Page 23, leave out lines 35 to 38 and insert--
("(a) the authorised officer of the Department of Finance and Personnel may, subject to any Act subsequently passed, authorise the issue of sums out of that Fund for the service of the year;").
Page 23, line 41, at end insert--
("( ) The aggregate of the sums issued under subsection (2), and (where applicable) the sums issued under subsection (1), for the service of any financial year shall not exceed 95 per cent of the total amount appropriated by Act for the service of the preceding financial year.").
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page