| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
(2) The proceedings on any further Message from the Lords shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement.
4.--(1) This paragraph applies for the purpose of bringing proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with paragraph 3.
(2) The Speaker shall first put forthwith any Question which has been proposed from the chair and not yet decided.
(3) The Speaker shall then put forthwith the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown which is related to the Question already proposed from the chair.
(4) The Speaker shall then put forthwith the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown on or relevant to any of the remaining items in the Lords Message.
(5) The Speaker shall then put forthwith the Question, That this House agrees with the Lords in all the remaining Lords Proposals.
Reasons Committee
5. The Speaker shall put forthwith the Question on any Motion made by a Minister of the Crown for the appointment, nomination and quorum of a Committee to draw up Reasons and the appointment of its chairman.
6.--(1) The Committee shall report before the conclusion of the sitting at which it is appointed.
(2) Proceedings in the Committee shall, if not previously brought to a conclusion, be brought to a conclusion 30 minutes after their commencement.
(3) For the purpose of bringing any proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with sub-paragraph (2), the chairman shall--
(a) first put forthwith any Question which has been proposed from the chair and not yet been decided, and
(b) then put forthwith successively Questions on Motions which may be made by a Minister of the Crown for assigning a Reason for disagreeing with the Lords in any of their Amendments.
(4) The proceedings of the Committee shall be reported without any further Question being put.
Miscellaneous
7. The following paragraphs apply to--
(a) proceedings on Consideration of Lords Amendments to the Bill.
(b) proceedings on any further Message from the Lords on the Bill, and
(c) proceedings on the appointment, nomination and quorum of a Committee to draw up Reasons (and the appointment of its chairman) and the report of such a Committee.
8. Standing Order No. 15(1) (Exempted business) shall apply to the proceedings.
9. The proceedings shall not be interrupted under any Standing Order relating to the sittings of the House.
10. No dilatory Motion with respect to, or in the course of, the proceedings shall be made except by a Minister of the Crown; and the Question on any such Motion shall be put forthwith.
11.--(1) If on a day on which any of the proceedings to which paragraph 7 applies take place a Motion for the adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 24 (Adjournment on specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration) would stand over to Seven o'clock--
(a) that Motion stands over until the conclusion of any of the proceedings which are to be brought to a conclusion at or before that time, and
(b) the bringing to a conclusion of any of the proceedings which are to be brought to a conclusion after that time shall be postponed for a period of time equal to the duration of the proceedings on that Motion.
(2) If a Motion for the adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 24 stands over from an earlier day to such a day, the bringing to a conclusion of the proceedings on that day is postponed for a period of time equal to the duration of the proceedings on that Motion.
12. If the House is adjourned, or the sitting is suspended, before the expiry of the period at the end of which any of the proceedings are to be brought to a conclusion under this order, no notice shall be required of a Motion made at the next sitting by a Minister of the Crown for varying or supplementing the provisions of this Order.
I shall speak briefly on the supplemental allocation of time motion for the Police (Northern Ireland) Bill, which we last debated on 11 July. The Bill has been the subject of the most intensive consultation with Members of both Houses and with parties, interested individuals and statutory organisations across the board. No part of the
body politic has not expressed a view, and we are now considering a measure that has benefited from such extensive input.As the Bill stands, it deals with policing realities and with the Patten report, not people's interpretations of Patten. When implemented, it will deliver an effective, accountable and--most importantly--acceptable police service that will meet the needs of the new Northern Ireland.
When the House finished its consideration of the Bill in July, the Government accepted that it would undergo further changes during its consideration in the other place. As a result of helpful and constructive debates in the other place, the Bill has undergone significant improvement. In particular, we have improved the financial accountability arrangements between the Policing Board, the Chief Constable and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and the way in which it will deliver best value standards. Enhancements have also been made to its approach to recruitment to the new service.
I am pleased that our approach on that issue is underpinned by the exemption obtained to the European Community employment directive. There are, of course, several amendments dealing with that and other issues. In total, we have to consider 140 amendments from the other place, although some 40 are minor and miscellaneous, and more than 25 involve best value.
In the main, the amendments arise from detailed debates in Committee in the House and from constructive consideration in the other place. The motion provides sufficient time for the consideration of those amendments. I hope that the House will agree that it is better to use our time wisely and productively by discussing their substance than to have a general debate on the Bill's principles.
The Bill will deliver good and effective policing with a police service that is representative of the whole community. That is what the Good Friday agreement called for when it suggested that there should be a review of policing in Northern Ireland. The Government have honoured that commitment and I look forward to our debates on the amendments. I commend the motion to the House.
3.53 pm
Mr. Andrew MacKay (Bracknell): Any Parliament that decides to reform policing in Northern Ireland must, surely, have one simple objective: to ensure that the ordinary, law-abiding and decent majority of people in both communities are better protected from the men of violence and from terrorism.
We need to reflect on whether passing the Bill tonight will achieve that sole objective. I fear that it will not because certain significant amendments, which were moved in another place by my colleagues, were defeated by the Government majority. There has been no compromise over the name, so the Royal Ulster Constabulary will completely lose its name and its cap badge, although the insignia represent both communities. That will adversely affect police morale and therefore endanger safety and life in the Province.
Even more serious are our amendments on the composition of the Policing Board and the district policing partnerships. Those bodies will involve a real
security risk because men of violence--previously convicted terrorists--and those representing paramilitary parties will be able to sit on the board and on district policing partnerships. That is not in the interests of the ordinary law-abiding majority of people in both communities, whom it is our duty to protect.I ask the Minister and the Secretary of State, what purpose does the Bill serve? It has not even achieved the Secretary of State's precious and necessary objective of persuading nationalist and republican politicians to encourage their community to join the police force. In the last few weeks, SDLP and Sinn Fein politicians have failed to agree to call on their communities to join the police force, despite the loss of the name and the loss of the cap badge, and the--in my view--serious omissions represented by allowing ex-terrorists on to the board. I believe--
Mr. Speaker: Order. I did not wish to interrupt the right hon. Gentleman, but we are discussing the allocation of time motion. Perhaps those matters can be discussed when we come to the amendments.
Mr. MacKay: Absolutely, Mr. Speaker.
It is for that reason--the fact that we have lost votes in the other place--that I see no case for the supplementary timetable motion. Very few controversial amendments are left. This is just another example of the Government's wishing to railroad everything through, and wishing never to allow the House to have proper debate.
I ask myself why there is any need for a timetable, given that the Minister readily acknowledged that many of the amendments were very minor and very technical, and given that very few are controversial. It makes me wonder whether, owing to the Government's defeat in another place last night on the Disqualifications Bill, they were anxious to make more time to allow that squalid little Bill to return to this place rather than being buried, as it effectively was by the removal of clause 1 last night.
The Government would be singularly ill-advised to bring back the Disqualifications Bill. It was not in the Queen's Speech. All it has done is attempt to appease Sinn Fein, and we do not wish to see it.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |