| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Henry Bellingham (North-West Norfolk): Is the Minister aware that there are a number of prison officers in my constituency who work at Whitemoor, Wayland and Norwich? They completely refute any suggestion that there is a climate of intimidation. They have never heard anything quite so ridiculous, because they support the strong leadership given by the Government.
Miss Widdecombe: I can indeed confirm that. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making it clear that those
who work at the sharp end in the Prison Service, and who do such magnificent work, have confidence in the Government's policies.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: As someone who has joined the Minister on many occasions in the life lobby, where she has taken a position of principle, I find it quite astonishing that she could spend the last week going on television, and come to the House today, to defend this practice. This is the practice of the last century. The great body of British public opinion believes that it is wrong that pregnant women should be manacled in prison. I call on the Minister once again to think of her principles of the past and to stand up and demand a review of this utterly inhumane policy.
Miss Widdecombe: I can see no connection between the principles connected with the campaign to which the hon. Gentleman referred, from which I have never resiled, as well he knows, and the issue before us at the moment. Concern is taken for the mother and therefore also for her baby in all the medical attention that we manage to secure. If a woman is taken to hospital before she is in labour, that is because we have taken seriously any possibility that that situation may have been arrived at. I do not think that it would be anything other than harsh to have women delivered in prison, which could well be the result of midwives going into prison, rather than patients going into hospital. If the hon. Gentleman reflects on it, he will find that what I have said is a civilised and secure policy.
Mrs. Teresa Gorman (Billericay): Will my hon. Friend confirm that this woman was in prison for theft, and that, unless she were pregnant at the time that she committed the offence, the chances are that it was not a first offence, and that it is essential that even women who are pregnant must be treated from the point of view of punishment, as everybody else in our society is? Is she aware that the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) has on a previous occasion sought to exploit an aspect of the Prison Service and had to be bailed out by his own leader because he got into such a state? Is not the Labour party doing exactly the same as it did on that occasion: trying to exploit some aspect of prison arrangements for its own political advantage?
Miss Widdecombe: It is very clear to me that the Opposition pay scant regard to facts and rather more regard to political advantage. The hon. Member for Knowsley, North (Mr. Howarth) met me to discuss the policy, and we had an entirely sensible discussion about it. He did not express shock, horror and outrage about the policy that has been implemented throughout.
Mrs. Audrey Wise (Preston): Will the Minister ask the Royal College of Midwives to conduct a private seminar for her about some of the basic facts of childbirth? She will learn that there is no single second when someone can say that a woman has gone into labour. The possession of forms to be filled in does not alter the biological facts. The onset of contractions usually leads to the development of labour, and it is a scientific fact that, if trauma is interposed, labour can be arrested--which is not a very good idea for anyone concerned.
Will the Minister tell us exactly when the form was filled in and how much later that occurred? Does she think it likely that a woman who was about to go into labour would run away, and where would she run to?
Miss Widdecombe:
With regard to telling the hon. Lady the exact moment at which labour commenced, that is a matter for medical advice. That is why we always take medical advice and that is why we act upon it as soon as it is received and remove restraints.
The Director General of the Prison Service will shortly meet the president of the Royal College of Midwives to have what I hope will be a slightly more constructive discussion than we have had today. They will discuss respective concerns and examine what can be done to reassure the public, who may have been deceived by the wild and rash claims of the Labour party. I say once again: no woman in labour, as defined on medical advice, is secured.
Ms Diane Abbott (Hackney, North and Stoke Newington):
Does the Minister accept that any woman who has had a child will find her statements utterly repellent? They will find the grins on the faces of Tory Members of Parliament even more repellent.
Will the Minister allow me to spell it out? Whatever forms she may have seen, once a woman's waters have broken, her cervix is dilated and she is sitting or standing awaiting the onset of labour contractions, she will not be running anywhere. There is a world of difference between being four and a half, six or even seven months pregnant and the final hours of pregnancy. Does the Minister accept that it is degrading and inappropriate for women to be shackled to men in the final hours of pregnancy?
Miss Widdecombe:
On the last point, I have said already that I fully share the concern expressed about male officers being involved at that stage and, if possible, we shall move to a position where female officers are used on such occasions. I share the hon. Lady's concerns in that regard, and I do not seek to diminish them in any way.
The hon. Lady gave a graphic description of the onset of labour, but I am sure that she does not need to tell the medical profession about it. Medical professionals know all the facts, and we take their advice.
Ms Jean Corston (Bristol, East):
Will the Minister confirm that the board of visitors at Holloway prison warned her that the practice was continuing? Why did she choose to do nothing about it then?
Miss Widdecombe:
Because our policy has been fully implemented.
Mr. George Howarth (Knowsley, North):
I visited Holloway early in December, and if I were not concerned about the practice, I would not have sought a meeting with the Minister. The Minister said that I put my arguments in a very reasonable way. Therefore, does she accept that I sought a meeting with her because I was concerned about the practice? If she did not believe that we were protesting about the manacling of women during pregnancy, why-- on the very day that I visited her at the Home Office-- did the acting Director General of the Prison Service, Mr. Richard Tilt, issue a letter on the subject? In that letter, he said:
Miss Widdecombe:
I am happy to confirm that, when the hon. Gentleman came to see me, he put his points very reasonably. He was seeking clarification of the policy. We had decided, because there had been so much discussion and misinformation, to reiterate the exact terms of the policy. They were not fresh instructions; they were a reiteration of existing instructions.
Madam Speaker:
Order. We shall now move on.
Mr. Robert Hughes (Aberdeen, North):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. As you will know, there has been exceptionally severe weather over the past few weeks in Scotland. In the Grampian region, for example, many schools opened only today, and some are still closed. Local authorities have incurred phenomenal extra costs that are way beyond anything for which they could reasonably have been expected to budget--at a time when they have been told that budgets will be cut even further. Surely the Government must make a statement on how those extra costs are to be met.
Have you had any requests from the Government to make such a statement? If they had any care for the people still unfortunately under their rule, it seems logical that they would make a statement about what is to happen.
Madam Speaker:
I have not been informed today that the Government are seeking to make a statement on the issue that the hon. Gentleman raised.
Mr. George Galloway (Glasgow, Hillhead):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Have you had any notice of ministerial intention to make a statement on what has become notorious as the Vickers memorandum? In that memorandum--written by a captain of industry and knight of the realm, Sir Colin Chandler, following discussions with Dick Evans, the chief executive of British Aerospace--a conspiracy is unveiled, involving the possible kidnap or murder of a political refugee, Professor Muhammad al-Masari, who was living peacefully in London. Is there any indication that the Government will explain the extraordinary events and their relationship to the decision to deport Mr. al-Masari?
"Cuffs are also to be removed from women who are in labour".
In other words, he reiterated the policy that was supposed to operate. However, the events took place after those assurances were given to me and after that letter was sent
out by Mr. Tilt. Is it not the case that the Minister simply did not do anything when she knew full well what was going on?
Points of Order
3.56 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |