| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
7 Apr 2003 : Column 38—continued
Northern Ireland
- That the draft Local Elections (Northern Ireland) (Amendment) Order 2003, which was laid before this House on 31st March, be approved.
Agriculture
- That the Farm Waste Grant (Nitrate Vulnerable Zones) (England) Scheme 2003 (S.I., 2003, No. 562), dated 6th March 2003, a copy of which was laid before this House on 10th March, be approved.
Fees and Charges
- That the draft Department of Transport (Fees) (Amendment) Order 2003, which was laid before this House on 11th March, be approved.
Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism
- That the draft Terrorism Act 2000 (Code of Practice on Video Recording of Interviews) (Northern Ireland) Order 2003, which was laid before this House on 12th March, be approved.—[Derek Twigg.]
POLICE (NORTHERN IRELAND) BILL [LORDS] (PROGRAMME) (NO. 5)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Orders [28 June 2001 and 29 October 2002],
- That the following provisions shall apply to the Police (Northern Ireland) Bill [Lords] for the purpose of supplementing the Orders of 10th February 2003, 4th March 2003, 5th March 2003 and 26th March 2003.
Consideration of Lords Message
1. Proceedings on consideration of the Lords Message shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion two hours after their commencement.
Subsequent stages
2. Any further Message from the Lords may be considered forthwith without any Question put.
3. Proceedings on any further Message from the Lords shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement.—[Derek Twigg.]
Police (Northern Ireland) Bill [Lords]
Lords amendments to certain Commons amendments considered.
Lords amendment: No. 48ZA, in Commons amendment No. 48, leave out "or (Belfast)(2)" and insert—
", (Belfast)(2) or (Appointment of constables with special policing skills)(7)".
4.33 pm
The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Jane Kennedy): I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Michael Lord): With this it will be convenient to deal with Lords amendment No. 49A.
Jane Kennedy: The Government tabled amendments 48ZA and 49A in another place in response to a recommendation by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, under the chairmanship of Lord Dahrendorf. They provide for the affirmative procedure to apply to an order that the Secretary of State might introduce under the new clause that deals with the exceptional arrangements for recruiting constables with specialist skills. Hon. Members will recall that we debated that matter at some length last week.
The exceptional arrangements will be available for two years, starting from the date of the Bill's Royal Assent. The Secretary of State may extend the life of the provision on only one occasion—by order in Parliament, to allow it to operate for a maximum period of four years. At the end of two years, the Secretary of State could consider extending the provision. Any such extension would require the unanimous agreement of the Policing Board. It is important for hon. Members to bear that in mind.
Given the importance of the provisions and the strong views about the 50:50 recruitment arrangements that were expressed forcefully in the House and in the other place, we have agreed that it is appropriate for any order to renew the provisions for a further period of up to two years to be brought before both Houses of Parliament rather than be made by negative procedure.
I commend the amendments to the House.
Mr. Quentin Davies (Grantham and Stamford): We had a good opportunity to deal with the substance of the procedural amendments last week. I do not wish to reiterate those arguments. Clearly, the procedural change from negative to affirmative resolution is welcome. The Opposition therefore second the amendments.
Lembit Öpik (Montgomeryshire): There was considerable criticism of the Government's original proposals. All parties will be pleased that the Government have listened and tabled a late manuscript
amendment to provide for a change to an affirmative instrument. Given that policing is so sensitive, that is the right thing to do. The Liberal Democrats wholeheartedly support the good sense that Ministers have shown on the issue.
Lady Hermon (North Down): I assure hon. Members that my colleagues are with me in spirit, if not in body. However, I could not possibly speak for members of the Democratic Unionist party. I am surprised that none of them has turned up this afternoon, given that we are considering policing.
I should like reassurance from the Minister on one aspect. My views on 50:50 recruitment are well known. The Minister knows that my constituent, Mark Parsons, tested that recruitment procedure last July in the High Court in Belfast. The case will be heard on appeal towards the end of May. I have no quarrel with the special provisions and the recruitment of constables with special policing skills, especially detectives, which we desperately need in Northern Ireland. I voted for the amendment on that when we previously discussed the matter in the House.
Will the Minister assure me that renewal through affirmative resolution, which I support, and extension by order of the Secretary of State initially for two years and possibly for a further four years, will not make inroads into section 46 of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 2000? We should bear it in mind that section 46 is due for renewal in spring 2004, that the Mark Parsons case will be heard on appeal, and that its critical point was the temporary nature of the provision that permits the current discriminatory recruitment procedures. Will the Government consider removing that instead of extending it?
Jane Kennedy: The hon. Lady asks a valid question and I know of her acute interest in the matter. The renewal powers for the special arrangements for the 50:50 recruitment of Catholics and non-Catholics for the Police Service of Northern Ireland are sensitive, for the reasons that we debated last week. Their purpose is to address a specific problem that we experience in Northern Ireland. The renewal powers will allow Parliament to consider whether those exceptional circumstances still remain. We are considering a special exemption for the 50:50 powers, and I would not foresee the measure that we are discussing today having an impact on the other arrangements. We shall still consider whether we need these special affirmative recruitment powers—these discriminatory powers, as the hon. Lady describes them—to address the specific problem. We shall still need to consider whether the circumstances exist to justify those powers, at the appropriate time.
The measure before us will deal specifically with the circumstances that we were talking about, in which the Chief Constable has identified a particular shortfall and the Policing Board has agreed that such a shortfall exists. Such a situation should be dealt with using this exemption. The arrangements will not be exactly as the hon. Lady described. I did not wish to imply that the exemption would apply for two years, followed by four years. It would apply for two years for constables with specialist skills. There would then be consideration as to
whether it should be extended for a further two years—that is, the exemption itself, not the 50:50 arrangements as such.I hope that that will reassure the hon. Lady. She asked a very good question. I am grateful for the support that I have received from both sides of the House for this amendment. It is a sensible one that meets the concerns raised in another place, and I hope that the House will agree to it.
Lords amendment: No. 48A, in Commons amendment No. 48, at end insert—
- "(2B) No order may be made under section (Independent members: disqualification)(2) or Belfast)(2) at any time when section 1 of the Northern Ireland Act 2000 (c.1)(suspension of devolved government) is in force."
Amendment No. 48A deals with the commencement of the new clauses dealing with disqualification and the Belfast sub-groups. We spent a whole day considering the clauses on Report last week, and, in particular, discussing the context in which they might come into effect. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I made it clear—we certainly sought to make it clear—that neither of these provisions will come into force when the Bill receives Royal Assent. They will be commenced only by means of a subsequent order, which will be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure of both Houses of Parliament.
The Government have consistently made it clear that we would envisage bringing the clauses into effect only in the context of acts of completion. That phrase, which I have used consistently throughout our deliberations, has attracted some criticism, but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State was even more specific on Report when he said of the clauses:
- "They will not come into effect unless we have agreement that those acts of completion have been dealt with." —[Official Report, 26 March 2003; Vol. 402, c. 361.]
My own view, put simply, is that we need a situation in which the brave new world envisaged by the Belfast agreement is working properly and as it should, in which the institutions are working effectively, and in which the basis for politics in Northern Ireland is trust and mutual co-operation, not threats and fear. I sense that Members of both Houses of Parliament are looking to the statute to find a way of summing up those sentiments. Of course, there will be an element of political judgment for the Secretary of State as to when such a point is reached. The hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik) made that point in his speeches on this issue. I know, however, that Members are concerned that the decision should not be left to the Secretary of State alone.
We have said previously that the clauses would not be commenced without the explicit approval of both Houses, and that no commencement order would be brought forward before acts of completion had been dealt with. I think that I failed to reassure the hon. Member for North Down (Lady Hermon) on that point
last week. The Lords amendment before us today, which was tabled in another place in the names of Lord Smith of Clifton and Lord Glentoran, provides that the clauses cannot be commenced unless devolution has been restored—that is, unless the institutions are up and functioning. In our different ways, we are each aiming for the same thing.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |