You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Hansard > Commons Debates > Commons Debates by date > Commons Debates - previous sessions > Bound Volume Hansard - Debate
Previous SectionIndexHome Page

26 Mar 2003 : Column 304—continued

Mr. Hoon: Again, I can assure my hon. Friend that there will be an immediate and urgent investigation. The medical arrangements have been reviewed and are in place, and they are proving to work very successfully. Not only are we able to stabilise people where necessary on the battlefield, but we have the RFA Argus in position, providing state-of-the-art facilities that are the envy even of personnel from the United States.

Mrs. Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham): It is good to know that the International Committee of the Red Cross is now operating in Basra—we must commend it for the fantastic work that it does—but the Secretary of State will know also that the Red Cross has asked for permission to visit the prisoners of war to make sure that they are being treated humanely. I understand that, as of yesterday, it had not received a response. Can he confirm whether we have granted the Red Cross access to all Iraqi prisoners of war and whether Iraq has granted access to our coalition service men and women who are currently being held by the regime?

Mr. Hoon: I am grateful to the hon. Lady for those remarks. I made the point about the International Committee of the Red Cross and the excellence of the work that it continues to do in Basra. We will certainly seek to support its efforts. I am aware of an agreement with the committee on visits to Iraqi prisoners of war, and I anticipate no difficulty about that being achieved. I am certainly not aware that the Iraqi authorities have extended the same opportunity to visit coalition prisoners of war.

Mrs. Anne Campbell (Cambridge): Can my right hon. Friend give a little more detail about the reported uprising in Basra yesterday and whether that uprising was effectively quelled by the Iraqi regime? Can he describe any further steps that can be taken to support future uprisings? Can he say what happened to the civilians who were involved in that uprising?

Mr. Hoon: The position inside Basra is necessarily confused. Certainly, there appear to have been reports of, if not an uprising, certainly a protest against Saddam Hussein's regime. We are aware that the thuggish elements of that regime that lie behind Saddam Hussein turned their fire, including the use of mortars, on the civilian population—the civilian population of one of their own cities, I emphasise. We took immediate action to assist. A substantial bomb was dropped on the Ba'ath party headquarters—I am aware that not much is left of it, which certainly appears to have reduced some of the activities of those thuggish elements—but we will obviously continue to take every opportunity to support the people of Basra to achieve their liberation.

Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire): Along with RAF Brize Norton, I am sure that the Secretary of State will want to join me in paying tribute to the airmen and women of RAF Lyneham, in my constituency, who

26 Mar 2003 : Column 305

pride themselves on the fact that their Hercules aircraft are the first in and the last out of every conflict, and this conflict is no exception.

On the media coverage, does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the unique feature of this war, as opposed to any previous one, is the fact that 600 journalists are, as the expression has it, embedded with our troops? Does he agree that they will need to show particular sensitivity during the forthcoming battle for Baghdad?

Mr. Hoon: One of the advantages of having been in my position for a number of years is that I have visited most of the armed forces facilities around the country. I have certainly been most impressed on the occasions that I have visited RAF Lyneham by the work that is carried on there, and by the excellence of the Hercules operation, for which I have good reason to be grateful—even if, sometimes, at the end of the journey, I did not feel quite as I did at the start. Certainly, the issue of embedded journalists is a difficult one, to which we must all face up as we watch the television screens hour by hour. Its real benefit, I believe, is in avoiding the kinds of problems that were mentioned earlier in relation to freelancing—independent journalists going off on their own into very dangerous circumstances in a fast-moving battlefield. The information being brought back by embedded journalists is of great assistance in explaining what is taking place, providing that, as I indicated earlier, it is put into a proper context in the overall campaign.

Angus Robertson (Moray): There is a tremendous appreciation in Moray for the often difficult but vital work being done by the welfare staff and support staff at RAF Lossiemouth and RAF Kinloss in informing relatives and friends of developments. I endorse fully the Secretary of State's comments earlier about greater restraint by certain parts of the press being welcome—I speak as a former journalist who has covered conflicts. Greater restraint is needed. More restraint might ensure that certain family members would not hear directly or indirectly about the death or injury of a loved one, which would be most welcome.

Mr. Hoon: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his observations. I entirely agree with his comments. I hope that that message is heard by all those involved.

26 Mar 2003 : Column 306

Points of Order

1.21 pm

Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Do we have your assurance that it was the length of the question that I asked, rather than my discordant view that politicians, for their own ends, in Washington and London, are using brave service men, that caused you to curtail my question?

Mr. Speaker: I will be perfectly straight with the hon. Gentleman, as I always am. He asked about three questions, instead of one supplementary. I expect one supplementary question: it is as simple as that. I sometimes allow some elbow room, but when it gets to the fourth supplementary, it is time to stop.

Mr. Alex Salmond (Banff and Buchan): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. A few seconds ago, the Secretary of State made a comment about embedded journalists, which seemed to go much further than previous comments by the Government about their policy on embedded journalists, in terms of the safety of the troops, in terms of the safety of journalists, and in terms of the credibility and independence, I think, of the reports. Will any Minister make a full statement on the whole concept of having journalists embedded with forces?

Mr. Speaker: That is a matter for the Minister concerned: it is not a matter for me.

Mr. Quentin Davies (Grantham and Stamford): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In a few minutes, we will consider the Police (Northern Ireland) Bill on Report. That Bill, taken with the Government's new clauses, schedules and amendments, bears little relation to the Bill that was dealt with Upstairs in Committee. There are six substantive new clauses, one 11-and-a-half page new schedule and 35 Government amendments. My questions are simple. First, are there any rules or limits in this regard? Would it be possible for the Government, if they were so minded—as we are moving in this direction—to introduce a one-clause Bill on Second Reading, have it debated in Committee, and then spring 99 new clauses on the House on Report? If there are limits, what are they? What is the point of our having a Committee stage as part of our legislative procedures, as we do in this House and in other legislatures worthy of the name around the world, if the Government can simply bypass the whole Committee stage with impunity and bring forward major, substantive new concepts and areas of policy on Report?

Mr. Speaker: I understand that we have been allocated six-and-a-half hours for debate on these amendments. Perhaps, during the course of those six and a half hours, the hon. Gentleman will ask the Government those questions, as they are really nothing to do with me. The amendments must have been in order, as I would not have selected them otherwise.

Mr. Peter Robinson (Belfast, East): Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. In the Northern Ireland Committee, which also considered this matter, the

26 Mar 2003 : Column 307

Minister gave a firm undertaking that these proposals would not be introduced until certain circumstances came about which have not come about. Surely it is out of order for the Minister to do that in these circumstances.

Mr. Speaker: I repeat that this is a matter for debate. It is up to the hon. Gentleman to raise that during the debate.

Rev. Ian Paisley (North Antrim): Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I agree that we must debate the matter, but it seems strange that when my party tables an amendment, it is not selected. Therefore, we cannot debate what we want to debate in the House.

Mr. Speaker: Perhaps it is something to do with the quality of the amendment. The hon. Gentleman knows the rules of the House: whatever amendments are before me, if they are in order, I will select them. Perhaps the message to him would be, "Better luck next time."

POLICE (NORTHERN IRELAND) BILL [LORDS] (PROGRAMME) (NO. 4)

Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Orders [28 June 2001 and 29 October 2002],


26 Mar 2003 : Column 308


    6. Proceedings on Third Reading shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at 7.00 p.m. on the second of those days.—[Gillian Merron.]

The House divided: Ayes 277, Noes 152.

Next Section

IndexHome Page