Mrs. Margaret Ewing (Moray): I present a petition that has been signed by more than 16,000 of my constituents. It relates to the reconfiguration of health trusts in the Grampian area and the desire to retain a unitary trust in the Moray area. It reads:
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound will ever pray, etc.
Mr. John Austin (Erith and Thamesmead): I have a petition that has been signed by several of my constituents from Erith and Thamesmead, from Greenwich and Woolwich, from Eltham and elsewhere. It expresses mounting concern at the impact of genetically modified organisms on the environment and at the fact that the risks to public health from those organisms have not been clearly established, and expresses the belief that it is crucial to safeguard the British landscape and its diverse flora and fauna. The petition states:
pray that your honourable House determines that no further consents should be granted to grow genetically modified crops until a full public inquiry has been carried out.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, etc.
Mr. Michael Jabez Foster (Hastings and Rye): It is perhaps an opportune moment, on the last day before the summer recess, to present this petition, which calls for the abolition of hunting with dogs, an issue which will not go away simply because the Bill of my hon. Friend the Member for Worcester (Mr. Foster), my namesake, has not been successful this Session. The petition states:
Declares That the hunting of wild mammals with dogs is a cruel and unnecessary activity which has no place in modern Britain And having supported the Wild Mammals (Hunting With Dogs) Bill
The Petitioners hereby request that the House of Commons in recognising the widespread public support for the measure shall call upon the Government to allocate sufficient time in the next session of Parliament for such measures to pass through the House.
Mr. Simon Hughes (Southwark, North and Bermondsey): It is obviously a week for petitions on matters ethical and related. In that context, I present a petition of 26,000-plus people--members and supporters of the Society of Doctors and Lawyers for Responsible Medicine--on the subject of transgenic transplant experiments. The petition
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons request the Secretary of State for Health to take action to bring to an end these health and life threatening experiments.
And the Petitioners remain, etc.
Mr. Patrick Hall (Bedford): I am pleased to present this petition of more than 600 signatures from residents of Bedfordshire, in particular Bedford and Kempston, who declare
The Petitioners therefore respectfully request that the House of Commons calls upon the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions to bring in the necessary measures to create a nationwide travel pass available free of charge to all pensioners and people with a registered disability.
Order for Third Reading read.
9.39 am
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Marjorie Mowlam): I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
We are grateful for the overwhelming support that the House has shown for the Bill, following the substantial backing for the agreement in Northern Ireland itself. Once the Bill is finally approved, the requirement of the triple lock, which successive Governments have agreed should apply to any settlement, will be satisfied.
The Bill is the culmination of a great deal of work in Northern Ireland. We have put a number of Bills before the House this year. The key developments show how much the Northern Ireland political landscape, which is the context in which this Bill will operate, if passed, has changed in the past 12 months.
It is instructive to remember that this time last year the talks participants were still deadlocked on the decommissioning question. They had not addressed their substantive agenda; they began that only in October. Once they did begin, the pace accelerated, culminating in the Good Friday agreement on 10 April. Since then, we have had a referendum, an election, an Assembly, a policing commission, a criminal justice review and a decommissioning body, as well as passing the Northern Ireland (Sentences) Act. We have also acted on our commitments on the Irish language.
Now the House is considering and, I hope, will shortly pass this Bill. It is major piece of constitutional legislation, which has been prepared in record time. We have been happy to acknowledge that further changes may be necessary, while still taking some pride in the Bill as it stands. It is, we believe, an essentially sound framework for the agreement institutions to operate within.
I crave the indulgence of the House for a moment as I want to thank the civil servants. The list that I have just given shows how much work has been done by Northern Ireland civil servants over past months. I also pay tribute to the many political party leaders, to the Prime Minister, to the Taoiseach and, above all, to the people of Northern Ireland who have given their support and encouragement to making progress with the Bill.
Of course, we respect the doubts that have been expressed about the agreement within the House and outside it. Those who doubt have often shown courage, too. However, I believe that people are ever more widely coming to the view, whatever their original reservations, that the agreement must be made to work. The Government will continue to do all that they can to ensure that the agreement comes fully into operation, in all its aspects. In doing that, we will listen to all shades of opinion, for the agreement or against it. We will work closely with the new authorities established in Northern Ireland. Those comments apply especially to the Bill, just as they do to other aspects of the agreement. We are anxious that the Bill should reflect the agreement as faithfully as possible and, within its terms, provide the most effective and flexible machinery possible.
We have always declared our willingness to look again at the provisions of the Bill to achieve those objectives. As a result, we made changes before its introduction on the basis of consultation, and we have made further substantial changes in Committee and on Report. For example, we have omitted a number of sections in the consultation draft that were questioned, such as the default powers of the Secretary of State; we have made the criteria for exclusion of Ministers and parties tighter, consistent with the agreement; we have sharpened many of the human rights provisions, so that, for example, all Assembly Bills will now go to the Human Rights Commission; the commission will advise the Assembly as well as the Secretary of State; the appointment criteria for commissioners better reflect the agreement text; and we have made clearer the scrutiny role of Assembly Committees, in line with the agreement.
Next Section
| Index | Home Page |