David Norris (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State's engaging honesty in stating that her principal reason for not accepting the first amendment is that it would require a separate budget. If it creates a charge on the Exchequer that would have been a reason for ruling the amendment out of order. This further highlights the completely chaotic state of rulings on admissibility of amendments. It is daft. Some important amendments have been ruled out because they created a charge on the Exchequer but in this case the Minister of State informed us a separate budget was required. Some jesuitical fluting around might happen to justify this but it is perfectly obvious there is a lack of coherence and we must examine this point.

I was very interested that the Minister of State suggested an independent review would be inefficient. Perhaps so, but this comes from a Government which seems to believe in the free market, privatisation and the franchising out of matters. What is wrong with franchising out a bit of independent scrutiny?

The principle with regard to the need for a separate budget clearly means a charge on the Exchequer.