| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Benn: Much emphasis has been put on clauses 5 to 7. Points that are new to me have been made. Will my right hon. Friend give me a categorical assurance that President Clinton was not told that, by the time that he arrived in Ireland, the provision would be embodied in statute? If that is the reason, let us know it and determine whether it is valid.
Mrs. Beckett: I do not speak for the American Government, but I assure my right hon. Friend that the issue that he raised has formed no part of the Government's consideration and the matter has not been discussed in that way.
I said at the outset that I did not speak at the start of the debate because I did not wish to take up the time of the House--and nor do I wish to do so now. The debate has veered between those who have complained that there has been insufficient time to consider the matters that will be before us in the Bill and those who have complained that they had heard all about the issue in the press before the House had met. Those points of view are valid, but they are not consistent with each other. I have been surprised to hear both expressed by the same person at times. The Bill follows what the Prime Minister said at Omagh. The way in which the Government intended to proceed was extensively discussed and trailed. Myhon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody) and others are rightly concerned about how the provisions will operate should the House decide to pass the Bill. We have made it plain that the matter will be kept under review. It will be examined and will
form part of the consultation process to which my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has referred, as will all the provisions of the Bill.
Mrs. Beckett:
If the hon. Gentleman will forgive me, I want to get on.
It has been said during the debate that the matters in the second part of the Bill will not form part of the review. That is not correct.
Mr. Cash:
On a point of order, Madam Speaker.
Mrs. Beckett:
Any issue on which hon. Members have concerns can be raised--
Madam Speaker:
Order. I have a point of order. I think that it is more a point of frustration.
Mr. Cash:
I have already raised with the Prime Minister and with you, Madam Speaker, the question whether the long title could be amended. I have had further discussions with the Clerks, and it is clear that there are significant difficulties, unless the Leader of the House is prepared in principle to concede that that could be done--
Madam Speaker:
Order. That is not a point of order for me. It is an intervention on the Leader of the House, who may now continue.
Mrs. Beckett:
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I can only say to the hon. Gentleman--
Mrs. Dunwoody:
Will my right hon. Friend give way?
Mrs. Dunwoody:
My right hon. Friend was kind enough to refer to me. May I ask her, very seriously, whether the Government will simply accept that the Bill is a complex one which has enormous implications? Even those of us who want to see on the statute book those aspects of the Bill that are most urgently needed in Northern Ireland have real reservations about it. During the next part of the debate, will she seriously consider whether there is a way in which the guillotine can be removed?
Mrs. Beckett:
The motion is not, strictly speaking, a guillotine motion. It is a business motion, which was carefully considered so as to try to give a fair amount of time for the debate. It does give more time than has been given for debate on such matters in the past. I believe that the House has the capacity thoroughly and properly to debate the proposals that the Government are making, should the House wish to use and exercise that capacity. I am anxious, as I know my hon. Friend will be, to proceed towards allowing the House to take that step.
Mr. Dafydd Wigley (Caernarfon):
Does the Leader of the House accept that some of the implications of clauses 5 to 7 are technical and that Members might be well advised to consult people outside the House before
Mrs. Beckett:
There have been recent terrorist events in places other than Omagh and therefore that is not the sole reason why the Government feel it necessary to put before the House the prospect of acting with some speed. The right hon. Gentleman says that the matters in the latter part of the Bill raise certain issues, but those issues have themselves been extensively discussed by the House over the past couple of years in a variety of different contexts. Therefore it has been possible for people to become conscious of some of the implications of the issues that he raises. However, it is undoubtedly the case--
Mr. Cash:
Will the right hon. Lady give way?
Mr. Ian Taylor:
Will the right hon. Lady give way?
Mrs. Beckett:
With great respect to both hon. Gentlemen, I do not think that our constituents who send us here expect us to spend our time discussing the minutiae of how we debate the Bill. I say that with great respect to the hon. Gentlemen, who are both long-serving Members of Parliament, and bearing in mind the fact that the hon. Member for Stone has voted for a guillotine on a previous occasion.
Mr. Cash:
Will the right hon. Lady give way?
Mrs. Beckett:
I shall not give way. I am simply saying to the hon. Gentleman and to the House that I have been a Member of Parliament for as long as many and it has never been my practice to debate sittings motions and take up time, unless it was absolutely necessary. Hon. Members have raised important issues relating to whether matters should be handled in this way, but that question has been dealt with and I do not propose to deal with it at greater length.
Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North):
Will my right hon. Friend give way?
Mrs. Beckett:
I shall give way to my hon. Friend, but I say to him and to the House that I do not intend to give way again.
Mr. Corbyn:
The leader of Plaid Cymru, the right hon. Member for Caernarfon (Mr. Wigley), made an important point relating to clauses 5, 6 and 7 and their extra-territorial implications. Does my right hon. Friend accept that there is a need for serious discussion and consultation with a large number of people before the House takes such a major legislative step, which, in effect, will give power in British law to other countries when we do not have any such control over other countries' laws?
Mrs. Beckett:
I am sure that my hon. Friend has read the Bill and seen that the Government have taken steps to write safeguards into it. He will also be aware that the matter has been extensively discussed over a very long period before being put forward in legislation. I say both
The hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills, who feels passionately and strongly about the liberties secured in the House, spoke about the liberties secured for him here. The principal reason why the Government are introducing the Bill is that securing our liberties and securing peace within the United Kingdom are of great importance to us all. That is why those on the Opposition Front Bench supported the manner in which the Government are proceeding. The matters before us are ones that, from time to time, have to be considered with a little more dispatch than is our wont. The hon. Gentleman also said that he hoped that we would march step in step with the Irish Parliament and Government; we are seeking to do so today.
Question put:--
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |