| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Boateng: Let me finish the point. It is our view that, in those circumstances and whatever the age of the older party--older age does not necessarily bring with it a knowledge of the age of the younger party--it would be wrong for him not to have that defence available. He has to make use of that defence and to bring himself within it, but we think it right that the defence should be available to such individuals, regardless of their age, that, in certain circumstances, the older individual would not be expected to know the age of the younger. That is the distinction, so I do not accept that we have got ourselves into the sort of difficulty that the hon. Gentleman describes--
Mr. Clappison: Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Boateng: No, the hon. Gentleman has made his point and I intend to wind up the debate.
Dr. Julian Lewis: I am enjoying it.
Mr. Boateng: I am glad. I have not finished yet, so the hon. Gentleman may enjoy it some more.
In those circumstances, I do not believe that we have misdirected ourselves in relation to that defence. As to new clauses 2 and 3--which the hon. Member for Oxford, West and Abingdon urged us to accept--there is no limit to those under 25 for the first charge in England and Wales. It is a general defence, and the provisions are very wide and would make prosecution substantially more difficult. That is why we are unable to accept it. The hon. Member for Hertsmere found new clause 3 acceptable in the context of Northern Ireland. That is a matter for him, and hon. Members will make up their own minds. The reasons that we have given for opposing new clauses 2 and 3 stand.
The hon. Member for Oxford, West and Abingdon urged upon us the point about equality. The review will take account of several factors, including that issue. We have deliberately constructed a review process that is about expertise and a range of experiences and views--some of which are disparate. We have done that because we do not wish to circumscribe the basis upon which the review body approaches its task. It will perform its task within the year and produce proposals. It is right that those proposals should be subject to wide debate and discussion--we make absolutely no apology for that.
The hon. Member for Oxford, West and Abingdon has latched on to the notion that this is somehow an attempt by the Government to kick the issue into the long grass. That could not be further from the truth. Does he seriously expect us to conduct a rational debate about sexual offences issues--involving deeply personal and sensitive topics, including matters of conscience--without allowing proper, open consultation? That would be quite wrong, and we do not intend to go down that path. I am unable to give the hon. Gentleman, or the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Allan), any assurances about the outcome, save to say that we have made it clear that the
review must take into account the need to comply with the European convention on human rights and our treaty obligations thereunder. That will inform the outcome of the review's deliberations, the wider debate and, in due course, the House.
Mr. Boateng:
I will not give way: the hon. Gentleman has had more than enough time to explore his points. [Hon. Members: "Far too much."] The hon. Gentleman has added enormously to the gaiety of nations, but I do not intend to allow him any more time to speak on this issue.
As for the hon. Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne), there must be something in the water. I struggled with his contribution, but I was not persuaded by it. There will be a free vote in the House on this matter, and I hope that hon. Members will agree to new clause 4 and oppose new clauses 2 and 3. In light of my remarks, I hope that the hon. Member for Oxford, West and Abingdon will not push the matter to a vote.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
Order. Is the Minister giving way?
Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:--
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |