| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
26 Mar 2003 : Column 418—continued
Mr. Carmichael: I wish to place on record the fact that Liberal Democrats regard the amendments favourably. As the right hon. Member for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble) said, they are a straight, uncomplicated lift from the Patten report. Having said in the past that we regard the report as an all-or-nothing option, we are more than pleased to endorse the amendments. I understand, however, that they will not be pressed to a vote, and accordingly I hope that the Minister will find a mechanism, when she reads the debate in Hansard tomorrow—she may not be listening at the moment—to introduce similar amendments in another place.
The appointment of representative members is an important part of the normalisation process, and will ultimately contribute to the effective operation of the DPPs. It is important that the House should state that if a body is to be representative, especially in Northern Ireland, it must be judged and constituted according to something other than religion. References to ethnicity, gender and age are therefore of particular importance, and accordingly Liberal Democrats in the Commons and elsewhere support the amendments.
Jane Kennedy: May I tell the right hon. Member for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble) that I will review the consultation procedures used by the Northern Ireland Office? However, there was extensive consultation on the code of practice, including a detailed consultation with the Policing Board, on which the right hon. Gentleman's party is represented. The consultation began in January last year and concluded in the summer, and the code of practice was published in August. As a result of representations that I have received, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has said that he will look at the procedures that were followed by the board. Although the right hon. Gentleman's good wife did not succeed in joining a DPP, I was delighted that she succeeded in abseiling down the BT building the other day—she deserves respect and commendation for doing so.
We will review procedures, but we did consult widely. I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for tabling the amendments, which seek to put on a statutory footing the requirement already set out in the code of practice on the appointment of independent members of DPPs. However, they are not necessary, because the code
specifies what representativeness means, so it is not helpful to define it in the Bill itself. This is not the time or place to comment on the controversy. I attended the Belfast launch of DPPs last Wednesday, and it was refreshing to see DPP members from such a wide variety of backgrounds, despite the perceived bias that the right hon. Gentleman believes there has been. A significant proportion of new members of the DPPs are young people. They all share a desire to contribute positively to local policing and to improving community safety.It is right that we define what we mean by representativeness, but that should be done in a code of practice. By doing that, we would be complying with a request that was put to me by the chairman of the Policing Board on its behalf last September.
Mr. Trimble: The Minister says that the code of practice meets the case. Where does the code of practice refer to the desirability of people having expertise in matters of public safety?
Jane Kennedy: The code may not specifically use the phrase "expertise in community safety", but it clearly refers to concepts of representativeness, which we may not usually think of in the context of Northern Ireland. It refers to gender and equality in the widest possible sense.
Amendment No. 51 is, as the right hon. Gentleman said, one of a group of three amendments tabled for our consideration. It proposes that only those who are representative of business or trade unions or have expertise in community safety matters should be appointed as independent members. With my history of involvement with trade unions, it may seem curious for me to take issue with the right hon. Gentleman on an amendment that includes reference to trade unions, but it is important that we leave the board as much flexibility as possible in selecting independent members.
May I direct the right hon. Gentleman to page 30 of the code of practice, which deals with the eligibility criteria and lists as the first of a group of essential requirements the requirement that there should be a demonstrable interest in local community, community safety or policing issues?
Mr. Trimble: But not expertise.
Jane Kennedy: The code of practice refers to a value, a skill or experience that we would look for among those whom we would want to appoint to a district policing partnership. It is important that we leave the board as much flexibility as possible in selecting independent members. We do not want to be unduly restrictive. That is why it is inappropriate for us to tie the board's hands in the way that the amendments would do. The code of practice adequately meets the spirit of the amendments without being over-prescriptive. We are satisfied that the provisions laid out in the Bill, supplemented by the provisions of the code of practice, are appropriate and sufficient. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will withdraw his amendment and that clause 13 will stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Trimble: I have noted the Minister's comments. I know that her response was hurried, but I regret to say
that I find it wholly inadequate. The Patten report is clear about the need for solid expertise, and that does not appear in the code of practice. I ask the Minister to re-examine the matter.I had advised other hon. Members earlier that we did not intend to have any further Divisions, so that those who had been held in the House later than they thought they would be this evening could get on their way. Only for that reason, and not in any way connected with the merits of the matter or the quality, such as it was, of the Minister's response, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
The proceedings set down for the day being concluded, the Deputy Speaker brought proceedings to a conclusion, pursuant to Order [10 February].
Bill to be further considered tomorrow.—[Mr. Heppell.]
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Sittings in Westminster Hall
- That, on Wednesday 9th April, the sitting in Westminster Hall shall begin at half-past Nine o'clock and conclude at half-past Eleven o'clock.—[Mr. Heppell.]
Sittings of the House
- That, not withstanding paragraph (5) of the Order of the House of 29th October 2002 (New provision for earlier sittings on Wednesdays, and for Thursdays and Fridays), the House shall sit on Friday 11th April.—[Mr. Heppell.]
PETITIONS
Police Service of Northern Ireland Band
8.9 pm
David Burnside (South Antrim): Some 1,500 people from Northern Ireland, cross-community, have signed a petition to save the band of the Police Service of Northern Ireland. Tomorrow, in a performance at Ards leisure centre for Action Cancer, and on Friday at the passing out parade at Garnerville, 100 years of service of the band will come to an end. That service has included many sad events, such as funerals of the brave officers and men of the Royal Irish Constabulary and the Royal Ulster Constabulary, but also many happy community relations events of good service for all the community of Northern Ireland in promoting an excellent community relations performance on behalf of the police force and police service in Northern Ireland.
- Wherefore your petitioners pray that your honourable House request the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to encourage the Chief Constable of the Police Service for Northern Ireland to reconsider his decision to stand down the band.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Local Pharmacies
8.10 pm
Bob Spink (Castle Point): Local pharmacies are a key part of primary health care. They take a great burden away from our general practitioners and could do much more if regulations were altered to enable them to do so. They are an important element in our local communities, forming the very fabric of our society. We should recognise that they are not simply retailers, but health care professionals. The proposals of the Office of Fair Trading would damage the most vulnerable people in society—especially the elderly, those with mobility difficulties, young mothers and disabled and poor people. Deregulation would hurt, not help, the consumer and set back the pharmacy service for years.
I have three petitions to present from three different communities; I apologise for having to read out each petition.
The first petition is from Thundersley. It states:
- To the Honourable Commons of the United Kingdom, Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled.
The Humble Petition of Ms Patel, Norman Ladzrie, Godfrey Isaacs and others of like disposition sheweth
That local communities are best served by local pharmacies and that the OFT's recommendations to abolish the "control of entry" regulations would seriously damage local pharmacies.
Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House shall urge the Government to reject proposals that would allow unrestricted opening of pharmacies able to dispense NHS prescriptions, and to preserve local pharmacies and safeguard their continuing provision of services.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
The second petition is from the residents of the community of Hadleigh. It states:
- To the Honourable Commons of the United Kingdom, Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled.
The Humble Petition of Asif Moledina, Tony Thomas, Bill Sharp and others of like disposition sheweth
That local communities are best served by local, community-based pharmacies, and that the OFT's recommendations to abolish the "control of entry" regulations would seriously damage local pharmacies.
Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House shall urge the Government to reject proposals that would allow unrestricted opening of pharmacies able to dispense NHS prescriptions, and to preserve local pharmacies and safeguard their continuing provision of services to local communities.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
The third petition is from the residents of Canvey Island. It states:
- To the Honourable Commons of the United Kingdom, Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled.
The Humble Petition of Mr. Bill Sharp, Lance Munt, Norman Bambridge and others of like disposition sheweth
That local communities are best served by local, community-based pharmacies, and that the OFT recommendations to abolish the "control of entry" regulations would seriously damage local pharmacies.
Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House shall urge the Government to reject proposals that would allow unrestricted opening of pharmacies able to dispense NHS prescriptions, and to preserve local pharmacies and safeguard their continuing provision of services to local communities.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |