| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
3.52 pm
Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield): I congratulate the hon. Member for City of York (Mr. Bayley) on presenting his Bill with such passion and force. However, I oppose the Bill, because I think that it is fundamentally naive, and that it is wrong to introduce such legislation at this time.
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is endeavouring to find a package of best practice with which to address the problem of bribery around the world. The European Union is also examining that problem at present. However, the House must consider several questions before agreeing to the Bill.
How do we define bribery? If a United Kingdom contractor pays commission to an agent, which is common practice in third-world countries, and that agent passes on some of the commission to those who must decide whether they will purchase the services offered by that contractor, does that constitute a bribe--even though it is once, twice or thrice removed? Would we make it illegal for those companies to give commission? If a company finds that, in order even to be considered for a contract abroad, it must make a percentage contribution to the corporation advertising the contract, would that company also be committing an offence?
It is not by accident that it is not illegal for bribery to be paid to overseas companies from the United Kingdom. If the hon. Gentleman's Bill were enacted, it would probably rule many British companies out of applying for contracts abroad, which would simply fall into the hands of French, German, Japanese, American and other competitors in those countries. What consideration has the hon. Gentleman given to the jobs that would be lost in this country if his Bill became law?
The question of bribery is almost like the question of unilateral nuclear disarmament. Everyone would like the world to disarm itself of nuclear weapons, but Britain and now the Government have resolutely decided that to do so unilaterally would be wrong. I argue that, if the hon. Gentleman's Bill were passed into law, it would be wrong. It would lose valuable jobs, especially in high-tech areas in the sunrise industries in this country.
Although the hon. Gentleman presented his Bill with passion, it reflected an underlying naivety about the way in which business is done in this country and around the world. I say to the hon. Gentleman: wait. His dreams for a bribeless world may well come about. As I said, the European Union is examining the issue, as isthe Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. As the hon. Gentleman correctly pointed out, the White House is examining the problem. If the Bill is passed now, it will cost jobs in this country. For that reason, I oppose it.
Question put, pursuant to Standing Order No. 19 (Motions for leave to bring in Bills and nomination of Select Committees at commencement of public business), and agreed to.
Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Hugh Bayley, Mr. Gerald Kaufman, Mrs. Maria Fyfe, Mr. Peter L. Pike, Ms Diane Abbott, Mr. Charles Clarke, Dr. Phyllis Starkey, Dr. Ashok Kumar, Helen Jackson, Mr. Malcolm Wicks and Ms Rosie Winterton.
Mr. Hugh Bayley accordingly presented a Bill to create offences of international bribery and corruption; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 3 July, and to be printed [Bill 128].
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Order [15 January],
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 82 (Business Committee),
Report considered accordingly.
Resolved,
That paragraph 1(1) of the Order [15th January] relating to the Government of Wales Bill (Programme) be amended by substituting for the words "Ten o'clock on the seventh day" the words "Eleven o'clock on the seventh day; and on that day paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 15 (Exempted business) shall apply to the proceedings on the Bill for one hour after Ten o'clock.".--[Mr. Pope.]
Question agreed to.
That the further Report [24th February] from the Business Committee be now considered.--[Mr. Pope.]
Question agreed to.
That this House doth agree with the Committee in its Resolution.--[Mr. Pope.]
Following is the report of the Business Committee [24 February]:
That it had come to a further Resolution [24th February] in respect of the Government of Wales Bill, which it had directed him to report to the House:
That the Resolution of the Committee reported to the House on 19th January be varied so that--
(a) the sixth and seventh days allotted under the Order[15th January] to proceedings in Committee shall be allotted in the manner shown in the following table, and
(b) each part of the proceedings in Committee on those days shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion (in accordance with the Order) at the time specified in relation to that part of the proceedings in the third column of the table.
| Allotted day | Proceedings in Committee | Time for conclusion of proceedings |
| Sixth day | Amendments to subsection (2) of Clause 118 beginning before line 11 on page 56 of the Bill | 6.00 p.m. |
| Other amendments to subsection (2) of Clause 118 | 7.30 p.m. | |
| Clause 118 so far as not disposed of | 8.30 p.m. | |
| Clause 119, Schedule 9, Clause 120, Schedule 10, Clause 121, Schedule 11, Clauses 122 to 131 | 9.00 p.m. | |
| Clause 132, Schedule 12, Clauses 133 to 136, Schedule 13, Clauses 137 to 140 | 10.00 p.m. | |
| Seventh day | New Clauses standing in the name of Mr. Secretary Davies and New Clauses 1 to 13 | 6.00 p.m. |
| New Clause 14 | 6.30 p.m. | |
| New Clauses 15 to 21 | 8.30 p.m. | |
| New Clauses 22 to 30 | 9.20 p.m. | |
| New Clauses 31 to 34 | 9.35 p.m. | |
| New Clause 35 | 10.00 p.m. | |
| New Clause 36 | 10.30 p.m. | |
| Remaining proceedings | 11.00 p.m.
| |
Orders of the Day
Government of Wales Bill
[6th Allotted Day]
Mr. Denzil Davies (Llanelli): I beg to move amendment No. 374, in page 56, leave out lines 9 to 13.
The Chairman of Ways and Means (Sir Alan Haselhurst): With this, it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments: No. 493, in page 56, leave out lines 10 and 11.
No. 523, in page 56, line 11, at end insert--
No. 519, in page 56, line 13, at end insert--
No. 540, in page 56, line 26, at end insert--
Mr. Davies:
The amendment focuses on two aspects. First, there is the insertion into section 1(2)(a) of the Welsh Development Agency Act 1975 of "and social" after the word "economic". For the future, if the clause is accepted as it is drafted, one of the purposes of the Welsh Development Agency--it has to operate through its purposes--will be not merely the furtherance of economic development throughout Wales but the furtherance of economic and social development. That being so, the WDA will take upon itself the purpose of social development as well as and in addition to its present purpose of economic development.
The second focus of the amendment is on the replacement--if the clause becomes law--of the word "industrial" with "business" and "businesses" in relation to the purposes of the WDA. When it comes to the agency's functions, "industrial" is replaced by "business". I wish to consider the definition of "business", which is contained in paragraph 2 of schedule 10 to the Bill. The definition of "business" is important in relation to the replacement of "industrial" with "business".
I shall deal first with the importance of the words "social" and "social development", as I have explained, after "economic development". We are faced with a major change in the function and the purpose of the WDA. It may seem to be a small matter, but it presents a major change.
'(aa) in paragraph (a), for "or any" substitute "and every", and'.
'(d) after paragraph (d) insert--
"(f) to promote social equity in Wales.".'.
'(e) after paragraph (i) insert--
(j) to encourage the development of exports from Wales.'.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |