Skip to main content

European Communities (Finance) Bill Money

Volume 81: debated on Tuesday 25 June 1985

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

Queen's recommendation having been signified. Motion made, and Question proposed,

That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the European Communities (Finance) Bill, it is expedient to authorise—
  • (1) any increase attributable to that Act in the sums to be charged on and paid out of the Consolidated Fund or the National Loans Fund, or payable out of money provided by Parliament, under the European Conununities Act 1972; and
  • (2) the payment of any sums into the Consolidated Fund or the National Loans Fund.—[Mr. Lennox-Boyd.]
  • 10.15 pm

    In such moments of tension, a large gathering often finds it useful to sing a song. If it were within my power to suggest a song to the House, it would be the song which I believe was fashionable in your generation, Mr. Speaker, during the war—"We'll meet again". There is no doubt that, after the decision of the House tonight, we shall meet again, and pretty soon. One thing is obvious-we have collectively thrown away the one serious obstacle that we had to overspending in the EC. It is obvious that the proposals for the 1986 budget are already taking a serious chance.

    There has been no answer from the Government on whether the proposed budget is contemplating expenditure at the level of 1·35 per cent. There has been no answer from the Government about their assumptions about the level of the dollar. There has been no answer from the Government about whether they will com back again for another cut of public expenditure.—[Interruption.]

    I ask no special favour. We shall be back, and the Treasury will tell us once again that it has control of this expenditure. We shall have yet another reiteration of lame promises.

    I hope that some of my hon. Friends who were among the 131 hon. Members who signed an early-day motion last year, all of whom said that there was no place for an increase in expenditure on own resources, have a happy time this week explaining their change of stance to their constituents. I hope that they have a very happy time when we come back again in about one year—perhaps just before the next general election—and the Government present another lot of lame excuses and false promises about their having got control of expenditure in the EC.

    In the words of Vera Lynn, "We'll meet again".

    10.19 pm

    As I understand my history, this once fine and robust institution was established to control the people's money and to ensure that grasping potentates did not put their hands in people's pockets and spend their money without control. The prime duty of the House is to control expenditure and to ensure that the money is properly guarded and prudently spent.

    When we joined the Eurpean Economic Community we agreed to certain terms and conditions, which set out the amount of money that we would be able to make available to the Community and in what circumstances, the 1 per cent. VAT limit, levies and customs duties. We have signified today that we are prepared to allow a foreign institution of which we are a member—other people and other countries—to control the money of the British people to a greater extent. Not ony that, but the way in which we have made the agreement today will show other member states that in future they have but to ask and it shall be yielded up unto them.

    Not only in the past has the 1 per cent. ceiling been overcome by reimbursable loans, non-reimbursable advances and intergovernmental agreements, but today we are agreeing to increase the ceiling to 1·4 per cent. My hon. Friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury was asked to give the House the guarantees that if during the life of this Parliament, our European partners asked us to increase the VAT limit to 1·6 per cent. he would veto it, but he was silent. That silence speaks words and, indeed, volumes. It tells those in the EC that if they want more British taxpayers' money, they can have it.

    Today we have been concerned about the control of Community expenditure, especially the CAP. We have discovered from the speech of my hon. Friend that it is impossible to control agricultural expenditure.

    On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is traditional for the speeches of the chief Government and Opposition spokesmen to be drowned in hubbub, because they are only doing a job and their speeches are usually boring, but, when a Back-Bench Member tries to make some serious points, he should be heard. Some hon. Members are preventing us from hearing what my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton, North (Mr. Marlow) is saying. I am sure that we would all be grateful if you could ensure that those hon. Members who are interrupting our proceedings are quiet or leave the Chamber.

    Order. Every hon. Member should be heard in the House, and there is a good deal of discussion going on. I think that the hon. Gentleman is coming to the end of his speech.

    You may be right, Mr. Speaker, but I do not know. I may run out of steam in about 30 seconds, but I may talk for some time. I am sure that many hon. Members present do not want to hear what I have to say, and I would not be the slightest bit insulted if they left the Chamber now.

    I take this matter seriously, as I am sure my hon. Friends do. On behalf of the people whom we represent, we want to, and must, control Community expenditure, especially on the CAP. If we kept the 1 per cent. on VAT, the CAP would have to be controlled, because there would be no money to pay for increases. This year's budget is about 85 per cent. above the budget of four years ago. All hon. Members know that budgets are always overrun, and that we must make loans and intergovernmental agreements and bail out the Community. The probability is that this year we shall spend twice as much on the EC and the CAP as we did four years ago.

    My hon. Friend the Economic Secretary bravely said, "Do not worry. It is all right. We have a financial mechanism. We have the matter under control. Spending cannot run away in future." However, there is a regular annual increase in production of European agriculture of about 2 per cent., whereas the increase in consumption of European agricultural products within the EC is zero. Therefore, each year our surpluses will increase, and surpluses will be piled on surpluses. Obviously, if there is a disaster in the Third world, a famine and starvation, only a small part of the surplus is needed and can be moved in that direction. We would all support that, if it can be arranged. However, much of our surplus goes to the Eastern bloc, as my hon. Friend the Member for Southend, East (Mr. Taylor) so eloquently said.

    You and I know, Mr. Speaker, and I believe that the House knows, that the time will come when the Soviet Union and its allies in the Warsaw pact sort out their agricultural problems. They will become self-sufficient. So the Eastern bloc will be self-sufficient. China is becoming increasingly self-sufficient. India is becoming self-sufficient. Where shall we offload the growing surpluses that we shall have in the European Community? Instead of a deficit there will be a surplus, and a growing surplus, on the world market. The price that we get for our supluses, which will be even greater than in the past, will be even less than in the past. Therefore, if one multiplies the volume, which is increased, by the price difference, which is greater, one sees that the costs of the common agricultural policy will not be under control. They will increase. They will get further out of control.

    Up to now, my hon. Friend has discussed only the surplus problem in the existing Community. Does he share my concern that, should the enlargement of the Community go ahead to include Spain and Portugal, which the House will be asked to approve some time later this year, the surplus problems which he has identified will be made much worse, if only because those countries are looking to the Community to invest in them to increase their productivity and production, and there will be greater surpluses in a new range of products?

    I take my hon. Friend's point. I am not against Spain and Portugal coming into the Community, but I appreciate that that will increase the burden. There is, there was, and there should be, another way, and that is to put a ceiling on EC expenditure—to put a cap on the CAP expenditure. If that happens, it may well be that there will be problems to be dealt with. It may well be that there will be increased surpluses. It may well be that those surpluses will be greater in some European countries than in others. Why do we have to maintain the same rigours of the CAP throughout each and every Community country in the same way? If in future some countries produce more surpluses, why should not the taxpayers in those countries pay directly for the increased surpluses that they are creating? Under the present circumstances, no one is directly responsible. The Agriculture Ministers all meet, and they agree, given the political imperatives in their own countries, that their own farmers have to be satisfied. They do not have to find the money. They just agree what prices they can get away with politically. Somebody else has to find the money.

    If one spread the increased costs to the countries which were increasing those costs, those Agriculture Ministers, as members of their own Governments in their own countries, who have to be concerned about the taxpayers and consumers in their own countries, would sing a different tune. The buck would stop in the country where the surplus was being built up. That is a far more sensible way of dealing with the CAP. It is a way that would work and we could cut expenditure on the CAP.

    People say that I am anti-European. I am not anti-European — [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] I thank hon. Members. I am not anti-European.

    My hon. Friend is a European whether he likes it or not.

    Indeed, I am a European whether I like it or not.

    We want a large, unified market where 280 million people can trade. We want to cut down on non-tariff barriers, which we have done. But we do not need a colossal bureaucracy in Brussels across the Channel with a colossal budget to spend on European policies. If one is to allow insurance to cross frontiers in the European Community, if one is to allow goods to cross frontiers, if one is to allow companies to come together and have joint investment programmes, and if one is to increase the size of the market, why does one need money for that? We have dispensed with theproblem of the CAP. We should nationalise all or parts of it. That will save us some money. We do not need to vote for the money resolution on that basis.

    Why else does the Community need money? Does the Community need money for social or regional policies? As my hon. Friend the Member for Ludlow (Mr. Cockeram) said, do we need to send our cash across to Brussels so that the people there can launder it and send it back to us? They put great signs up outside towns and on roads saying that it is Community largesse, that people should be grateful for it, that the Community works, and that it is Community money. It is our money that we send there. They take some of it for administration and bureaucracy, dilute it in other ways, and return it to us. It would be more sensible for us to make our own decisions with our own money.

    The Government have advanced their case tonight on the basis that if we did not agree to the change in the VAT limits, we would not have had the system of rebates that will exist in future. The Government have claimed many times that it is a good deal because we shall be spending less money. That may be so, but under this deal our annual net contribution to the Community will be greater than it has been, and my hon. Friend the Member for Southend, East and others have said that within two or three years our net contribution will be about £1 billion a year.

    What special benefit will we in the United Kingdom get that is not available to other Community countries? Why should we pay this extra money? Hon. Members have talked about a membership club, golf club and Christmas club fee and so on. Why is our fee so much greater than any other country's? There is no justice in that. Not only are we concerned to prevent others putting their hands in the pockets of our people and taking their money. We are concerned to see that our people get justice, and this £1 billion that we shall be spending is unjust expenditure.

    The Minister said that this was the best we could get away with. I do not even believe that. We have massively underestimated our bargaining power. Consider the strength that we bring to Europe. We have oil in the North sea. There is almost a glut of energy at present, but circumstances can change rapidly. We have coal and oil, and the fact that we are energy-rich is a great strength to the other nations of Europe.

    We have a massive deficit—of about £7 billion—in trade in manufactured goods with the rest of the European Community. That represents hundreds of thousands of jobs. If we drove a hard bargain with the Community and said, "Why should we spend £1 billion a year for something that you are getting for nothing?" would we be told, "Get out of the Common Market. We do not want you any longer."?

    On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am wondering whether the ten-minutes rule has applied to speeches tonight. At any rate, it seems that the duration of speeches has been about ten minutes. Should it not apply now?

    I am grateful to my hon. Friend for allowing me time, by raising that point of order, to get my second wind.

    In view of our massive deficit in trade with the rest of the Community, what would happen if we insisted on a membership fee of, say, £300 million a year? That is a lot of money. Why we should pay £300 million when the French are paying nothing I am not sure. However, if, in negotiations, we insisted on that figure, would we be told to get out of the Common Market. Would the other countries say, "We will do without your market, your energy, your £300 million a year and your political expertise"? Not on your nelly, Mr. Speaker. They want us in.

    The Government's mistake has been severely to underestimate our bargaining power. Having done that, and having brought the measure before the House today, the Government have told us—hooray, hooray—that, despite the 1·4 per cent. ceiling, we have actually got a really great deal because after the rebate it will cost us only 1 per cent. But why is that a good deal? Figures given to me yesterday by my hon. Friend the Economic Secretary show that our average net VAT payment to the Community in the past four years amounted to 0·5 per cent. after rebate, so this great deal today will double our commitment.

    Ministers have said that our net contribution will be under control — we know that it will be about £600 million and then about £1,000 million and so on up. They tell us that the extra £240 million membership fee will actually cost us only £40 million because the rest will eventually come hack. But it is all public expenditure. The Opposition will be trying to crucify us later in the year because of our cuts in housing benefit, especially for elderly people, many of whom have voted Conservative for a long time and have got used to that extra spending money. There is a danger that that benefit will be attacked as a result of the Fowler review. That will be a small amount compared with the £240 million but it is all public expenditure.

    Our gross contribution to the Community has risen by 50 per cent. in the past four years. What other Government programme has risen by that amount? Community expenditure is out of control and passing the Bill today means that we shall have no hope of controlling it in the future. In response to interventions, the Government have said that the present ceiling will be 1·4 per cent., but they have not said that they will not agree to 1·6 per cent. or that they will not agree to further loans, doles, hand-outs, reimbursable this's and take-away thats. They have not said that there will be any further control. What if it rains? If it rains there will be a bigger crop and it will cost us more money, so even the 1·4 per cent. is not sacrosanct. The 1 per cent. that we had in the past was topped up by loans, too.

    The message is clear. The signal is on go. Take no account, just spend the money. Increase agricultural expenditure, increase expenditure on bureaucracy. Dream up nice little European policies and make nice federal Europeans of us all. The message from the Commission is that everyone should go off and devise strategies and policies. Then there will be great bartering and negotiating sessions. Some policies will be thrown out and some will be accepted. Then, because the British Government want some policies to be accepted, they will have to agree to others that they do not want. Last week we listened to a lot of nonsense about the temperature in the centre of a frozen pea. Our retailers and shopkeepers will have to buy expensive equipment that they do not need to meet standards that are not required because European regulations say they must.

    We have lost control over our own country. We have lost our sovereignty. We have lost control over our awn people's money, especially in what we have done today. If we had kept the 1 per cent. limit on own resources there would have been a chance that sanity would prevail and that sensible policy would break out. Sadly, we have sold the pass. We have given in. The message is clear and I regret it very much.

    10.39 pm

    I sense that the House might not wish me to return to the broad subject that we have been discussing all evening. I therefore confine myself to answering a question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Budgen) about the 1986 budget. This has not yet been published, so I cannot respond to his question.

    Question put:

    The House divided: Ayes 317, Noes 158.

    Division No. 247]

    [10.40 pm


    Alexander, RichardBrandon-Bravo, Martin
    Alison, Rt Hon MichaelBright, Graham
    Amess, DavidBrittan, Rt Hon Leon
    Ancram, MichaelBrooke, Hon Peter
    Arnold, TomBryan, Sir Paul
    Ashby, DavidBuchanan-Smith, Rt Hon A.
    Aspinwall, JackBuck, Sir Antony
    Atkins, Robert (South Ribble)Burt, Alistair
    Atkinson, David (B'm'th E)Butcher, John
    Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Vall'y)Butler, Hon Adam
    Baker, Nicholas (N Dorset)Butterfill, John
    Baldry, TonyCarlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)
    Banks, Robert (Harrogate)Carlisle, Rt Hon M. (W'ton S)
    Batiste, SpencerCarttiss, Michael
    Beaumont-Dark, AnthonyCash, William
    Beith, A. J.Chalker, Mrs Lynda
    Bellingham, HenryChapman, Sydney
    Bendall, VivianChope, Christopher
    Benyon, WilliamClark, Hon A. (Plym'th S'n)
    Biffen, Rt Hon JohnClark, Dr Michael (Rochford)
    Biggs-Davison, Sir JohnClark, Sir W. (Croydon S)
    Blackburn, JohnClarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)
    Blaker, Rt Hon Sir PeterClegg, Sir Walter
    Bottomley, PeterColvin, Michael
    Bottomley, Mrs VirginiaCoombs, Simon
    Bowden, A. (Brighton K'to'n)Cope, John
    Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)Corrie, John
    Boyson, Dr RhodesCouchman, James
    Braine, Rt Hon Sir BernardCranborne Viscount

    Critchley, JulianJohnston, Sir Russell
    Crouch, DavidJones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)
    Currie, Mrs EdwinaJones, Robert (W Herts)
    Dickens, GeoffreyJopling, Rt Hon Michael
    Douglas-Hamilton, Lord J.Kellett-Bowman, Mrs Elaine
    Dunn, RobertKennedy, Charles
    Durant, TonyKershaw, Sir Anthony
    Dykes, HughKey, Robert
    Eggar, TimKing. Rt Hon Tom
    Emery, Sir PeterKnight, Greg (Derby N)
    Evennett, DavidKnight, Dame Jill (Edgbaston)
    Eyre, Sir ReginaldKnowles, Michael
    Fairbairn, NicholasKnox, David
    Fallon, MichaelLang, Ian
    Favell, AnthonyLawler, Geoffrey
    Fenner, Mrs PeggyLawrence, Ivan
    Finsberg, Sir GeoffreyLawson, Rt Hon Nigel
    Fletcher, AlexanderLee, John (Pendle)
    Fookes, Miss JanetLeigh, Edward (Gainsbor'gh)
    Forman, NigelLennox-Boyd, Hon Mark
    Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)Lester, Jim
    Fowler, Rt Hon NormanLewis, Sir Kenneth (Stamf'd)
    Fox, MarcusLightbown, David
    Franks, CecilLilley, Peter
    Fraser, Peter (Angus East)Lloyd, Ian (Havant)
    Freeman, RogerLloyd. Peter. (Fareham)
    Freud, ClementLord, Michael
    Galley, RoyLuce. Richard
    Gardiner, George (Reigate)Lyell, Nicholas
    Gardner, Sir Edward (Fylde)McCrindle, Robert
    Garel-Jones, TristanMcCurley, Mrs Anna
    Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir IanMacfarlane, Neil
    Goodhart, Sir PhilipMacGregor, John
    Gorst, JohnMacKay, Andrew (Berkshire)
    Gow, IanMacKay, John (Argyll & Bute)
    Gower, Sir RaymondMaclennan, Robert
    Grant, Sir AnthonyMcNair-Wilson, P. (New F'st)
    Greenway, HarryMcQuarrie, Albert
    Gregory, ConalMadel, David
    Griffiths, Sir EldonMajor, John
    Grist, IanMalins, Humfrey
    Ground, PatrickMalone, Gerald
    Gummer, John SelwynMaples, John
    Hamilton, Hon A. (Epsom)Marland, Paul
    Hampson, Dr KeithMarshall, Michael (Arundel)
    Hannam, JohnMates, Michael
    Hargreaves, KennethMaude, Hon Francis
    Harris, DavidMawhinney, Dr Brian
    Harvey, RobertMaxwell-Hyslop, Robin
    Haselhurst, AlanMayhew, Sir Patrick
    Hawkins, Sir Paul (SW N'folk)Mellor, David
    Hayes, J.Merchant, Piers
    Hayhoe, Rt Hon BarneyMeyer, Sir Anthony
    Hayward, RobertMiller, Hal (B'grove)
    Heath, Rt Hon EdwardMills, lain (Meriden)
    Heathcoat-Amory, DavidMiscampbell, Norman
    Heddle, JohnMitchell, David (NW Hants)
    Henderson, BarryMonro, Sir Hector
    Heseltine, Rt Hon MichaelMontgomery, Sir Fergus
    Hickmet, RichardMoore, John
    Hill, JamesMorrison, Hon C. (Devizes)
    Hind, KennethMorrison, Hon P. (Chester)
    Hirst, MichaelMoynihan, Hon C.
    Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm)Neale, Gerrard
    Holland, Sir Philip (Gedling)Needham, Richard
    Holt, RichardNelson, Anthony
    Hordern, Sir PeterNeubert, Michael
    Howard, MichaelNewton, Tony
    Howarth, Alan (Stratf'd-on-A)Nicholls, Patrick
    Howe, Rt Hon Sir GeoffreyNormanton, Tom
    Howell, Rt Hon D. (G'ldford)Norris, Steven
    Howell, Ralph (N Norfolk)Onslow, Cranley
    Hubbard-Miles, PeterOppenheim, Phillip
    Hunt, David (Wirral)Oppenheim, Rt Hon Mrs S.
    Hunt, John (Ravensbourne)Osborn, Sir John
    Hunter, AndrewOttaway, Richard
    Irving, CharlesPage, Sir John (Harrow W)
    Jackson, RobertPage, Richard (Herts SW)
    Jenkin, Rt Hon PatrickParkinson, Rt Hon Cecil
    Johnson Smith, Sir GeoffreyPatten, Christopher (Bath)

    Patten, J. (Oxf W & Abdgn)Stevens, Martin (Fulham)
    Pawsey, JamesStewart, Allan (Eastwood)
    Peacock, Mrs ElizabethStewart, Andrew (Sherwood)
    Percival, Rt Hon Sir IanStewart, Ian (N Hertf'dshire)
    Pollock, AlexanderStradling Thomas, J.
    Porter, BarrySumbreg, David
    Portillo, MichaelTaylor, John (Solihull)
    Powell, William (Corby)Tebbit, Rt Hon Norman
    Powley, JohnTemple-Morris, Peter
    Prentice, Rt Hon RegTerlezki, Stefan
    Price, Sir DavidThatcher, Rt Hon Mrs M.
    Prior, Rt Hon JamesThomas, Rt Hon Peter
    Raison, Rt Hon TimothyThompson, Donald (Calder V)
    Rathbone, TimThompson, Patrick (N'ich N)
    Rees, Rt Hon Peter (Dover)Thorne, Neil (Ilford S)
    Renton, TimTownsend, Cyril D. (B'heath)
    Rhodes James, RobertTracey, Richard
    Rhys Williams, Sir BrandonTrippier, David
    Ridley, Rt Hon NicholasTwinn, Dr Ian
    Ridsdale, Sir JulianVan Straubenzee, Sir W.
    Rifkind, MalcolmViggers, Peter
    Roberts, Wyn (Conwy)Waddington, David
    Robinson, Mark (N'port W)Wainwright, R.
    Roe, Mrs MarionWakeham, Rt Hon John
    Rossi, Sir HughWaldegrave, Hon William
    Rowe, AndrewWalden, George
    Rumbold, Mrs AngelaWall, Sir Patrick
    Ryder, RichardWaller, Gary
    Sackville, Hon ThomasWalters, Dennis
    Sainsbury, Hon TimothyWard, John
    Sayeed, JonathanWardle, C. (Bexhill)
    Scott, NicholasWarren, Kenneth
    Shaw, Giles (Pudsey)Watts, John
    Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')Wells, Bowen (Hertford)
    Shelton, William (Streatham)Wells, Sir John (Maidstone)
    Shersby, MichaelWheeler, John
    Silvester, FredWhitney, Raymond
    Sims, RogerWiggin, Jerry
    Skeet, T. H. H.Wigley, Dafydd
    Smith, Sir Dudley (Warwick)Wilkinson, John
    Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)Wolfson, Mark
    Soames, Hon NicholasWood, Timothy
    Speed, KeithWoodcock, Michael
    Spence, JohnWrigglesworth, lan
    Spencer, DerekYeo, Tim
    Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)Young, Sir George (Acton)
    Squire, RobinYounger, Rt Hon George
    Stanbrook, Ivor
    Steen, AnthonyTellers for the Ayes:
    Stern, MichaelMr. Carol Mather and
    Stevens, Lewis (Nuneaton)Mr. Robert Boscawen.

    Aitken, JonathanClay, Robert
    Anderson, DonaldCocks, Rt Hon M. (Bristol S.)
    Archer Rt Hon PeterCohen, Harry
    Ashley, Rt Hon JackConlan, Bernard
    Ashton, JoeCook, Frank (Stockton North)
    Atkinson, N. (Tottenham)Cook, Robin F. (Livingston)
    Barnett, GuyCorbett, Robins
    Barron, KevinCowans, Harry
    Beckett, Mrs MargaretCox, Thomas (Tooting)
    Beggs, RoyCraigen, J. M.
    Bell, StuartCunliffe, Lawrence
    Benn, TonyDavies, Rt Hon Denzil (L'Ili)
    Bennett, A. (Dent'n & Red'sh)Davis, Terry (B'ham, H'ge H'l)
    Bermingham, GeraldDeakins, Eric
    Blair, AnthonyDewar, Donald
    Body, RichardDicks, Terry
    Boyes, RolandDixon, Donald
    Brown, M.(Brigg & Cl'thpes)Dobson, Frank
    Brown, (N'c'tle-u-Type E)Douglas, Dick
    Brown, Ron (E'burgh, Leith)Dubs, Alfred
    Budgen, NickDunwoody, Hon Mrs G.
    Caborn, RichardEadie, Alex
    Callaghan, Jim (Heyw'd & M)Eastham, Ken
    Campbell-Savours, DaleEvans, John (St. Helens N)
    Carlisle, John (N Luton)Ewing, Harry
    Clark, Dr David (S Shields)Fatchett, Derek
    Clarle, ThomasFaulds, Andrew

    Field, Frank (Birkenhead)Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)
    Fisher, MarkLofthouse, Geoffrey
    Flannery, MartinLoyden, Edward
    Foot, Rt Hon MichaelMcCartney, Hugh
    Forrester, JohnMcCusker, Harold
    Forsythe, Clifford (S Antrim)McDonald, Dr Oonagh
    Forth, EricMcGuire, Michael
    Foster, DerekMcKay, Allen (Penistone)
    Foulkes, GeorgeMcKelvey, William
    Freeson, Rt Hon ReginaldMacKenzie, Rt Hon Gregor
    George, BruceMcTaggart, Robert
    Godman, Dr NormanMcWilliam, John
    Gourlay, HarryMadden, Max
    Hamilton, James (M'well N)Maginnis, Ken
    Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)Martin, Michael
    Hardy, PeterMaxton, John
    Harrison, Rt Hon WalterMillan, Rt Hon Bruce
    Hawksley, WarrenMitchell, Austin (G't Grimsby)
    Haynes, FrankMoate, Roger
    Healey, Rt Hon DenisMolyneaux, Rt Hon James
    Hogg, N. (C'nauld & Kilsyth)Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)
    Holland, Stuart (Vauxhall)Nicholson, J.
    Howarth, Gerald (Cannock)Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon
    Hoyle, DouglasO'Brien, William
    Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)O'Neill, Martin
    Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S)Park, George
    Janner, Hon GrevilleParry, Robert
    John, BrynmorPatchett, Terry
    Kaufman, Rt Hon GeraldPavitt, Laurie
    Lambie, DavidPendry, Tom
    Leadbitter, TedPike, Peter
    Leighton, RonaldPowell, Rt Hon J. E. (S Down)
    Lewis, Terence (Worsley)Powell, Raymond (Ogmore)
    Litherland, RobertRadice, Giles

    Randall, StuartStrang, Gavin
    Redmond, M.Straw, Jack
    Richardson, Ms JoTaylor, Rt Hon John David
    Roberts, Ernest (Hackney N)Taylor, Teddy (S'end E)
    Robertson, GeorgeThompson, J.(Wansbeck)
    Robinson, G. (Coventry NW)Thorne, Stan (Preston)
    Ross, Wm. (Londonderry)Torney, Tom
    Rowlands, TedWalker, Cecil (Belfast N)
    Sedgemore, BrianWhitfield, John
    Sheldon, Rt Hon R.Williams, Rt Hon A.
    Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)Wilson, Gordon
    Shore, Rt Hon PeterWinnick, David
    Short, Ms Clare (Ladywood)Winterton, Mrs Ann
    Short, Mrs R. (W'hampt'n NE)Winterton, Nicholas
    Silkin, Rt Hon J.Woodall, Alec
    Skinner, DennisYoung, David (Bolton SE)
    Smith. C. (Isl'ton S & F'bury)
    Smyth, Rev W. M. (Belfast S)Tellers for the Noes:
    Soley, CliveMr. Tony Marlow and
    Spearing, NigelMr K. Harvey Proctor.

    Question accordingly agreed to.


    That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the European Communities (Finance) Bill, it is expedient to authorise—
  • (1) any increase attributable to that Act in the sums to be charged on and paid out of the Consolidated Fund or the National Loans Fund, or payable out of money provided by Parliament, under the European Communities Act 1972; and
  • (2) the payment of any sums into the Consolidated Fund or the National Loans Fund.