International Development (Reporting and Transparency) Bill

You will see from the notes in my hand, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that I propose to speak for only a few minutes on the Bill. I want to start with something that I have sometimes said in the House in this context. It is one of my favourite quotes, and it is something that Sir Winston Churchill said in 1931:"““I am not very anxious to help private Member’s Bills. I have seen a great many of them brought forward, and in most cases it was a very good thing that they did not pass. I think there ought to be a very effective procedure for making it difficult for all sorts of happy thoughts to be carried on to the Statute Book.””" That is a sentiment with which I thoroughly agree, as you know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as I attend the House assiduously on Fridays. Interestingly, this Bill is a paradox. At one and the same time, it contains too much and too little. The ““too much””, which has been touched on a number of times in the debate, is that in many ways it is otiose and redundant, as it seeks to repeat much information that is already in the public domain, although I concede that it seeks to bring it together. It is also wrongly targeted in the sense that at several points, bizarrely, it seeks to make the Secretary of State assess his own work. I should have thought that that does not take the subject much further forward: it is like asking a pupil to assess his or her own examination papers. That part of the Bill is almost certainly misdirected. I have been pleased, however, by a number of contributions during the debate that have pointed out weaknesses in the Bill or areas where it could be strengthened. I have such thoughts—I will only touch on one or two of them at this stage, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but, as you will know, we will have ample opportunity subsequently to amend the Bill in different ways. I should like the Bill to be strengthened by it having to give more details on what recipient countries spend, for example, on military and defence or bureaucratic and diplomatic matters. I am rather uneasy, on behalf of my taxpayers, that money of ours should go to countries that have spending priorities that would not bear any scrutiny in our community or political context. In the cause of transparency I would like a lot more information to be produced about how recipient countries spend their money, before we give them even more. That would strengthen the case that the right hon. Member for Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill (Mr. Clarke) and his friends seek to make. Similarly, we need to know a lot more about what non-governmental and charitable organisations are giving to various countries in order to set in context the amount that the taxpayer is expected to give through the various vehicles that we have in this country, either directly or through multilateral and European Union sources. I recognise the aims of the Bill—as with most Bills on Fridays, the aims are very laudable—but surely we are here on behalf of our voters and taxpayers to satisfy ourselves that it is not just a good thought, heart-warming and makes us feel better about ourselves, but achieves most or all or something of what it seeks to achieve. This Bill is too general, it is insufficiently focused and in some respects requires strengthening. I hope that we will be able to do that subsequently. I am very keen for the Bill promoted by my hon. Friend the Member for North-West Cambridgeshire (Mr. Vara) to get an airing in the Chamber today. I hope that the Bill promoted by the right hon. Gentleman will, on receiving its Second Reading, as it undoubtedly will in a short time, go into Committee and come back on Report in order that those of us who seek to amend it have a jolly good opportunity to do so.