| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Hunting Bill (Programme) (No. 4)
10.27 pm
The Minister for Rural Affairs and Local Environmental Quality (Alun Michael): I beg to move,
- That the programme order of 16th December 2002 in relation to the Hunting Bill be varied as follows—
1. Proceedings in the Standing Committee on recommittal shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion on Monday 7th July.
2. The Standing Committee shall have leave to sit twice on the first day on which it meets.
3. Proceedings on consideration following recommittal shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion two hours after their commencement.
4. Sessional Order B (programming committees) made on 28th June 2001 shall not apply to proceedings on consideration following recommital.
As I made clear in last night's recommittal motion, the Bill stands recommitted to the same Standing Committee that considered it previously. There should therefore be no steep learning curve, and the Committee will be able to deal with the business that we put to it.
The Government amendments have been tabled today. They will do three things, which are consequential on last night's votes. First, they will remove all the provisions that relate to the registration and tribunal system. Secondly, they will provide for the amended Bill to come into force three months after Royal Assent. Thirdly, they will amend the exemption schedule to allow strictly limited use of a dog below ground to protect birds for shooting.
Although there are 22 Government amendments, most are straightforward deletions and there is no reason for the Committee not to deal with them in two sittings.
Mr. John Redwood (Wokingham): When a Minister has had his policy catastrophically defeated in the House and the opposite policy inflicted upon him, should he not resign?
Alun Michael: I will not take that from the right hon. Gentleman, who during his period in office could not even sing the Welsh national anthem. That should have been a resigning matter on the spot.
Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex): Will the Minister give way?
Alun Michael: I will happily give way to the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Soames: I am very grateful to the Minister. Regardless of whether my right hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood) knew the words of the Welsh national anthem, will the Minister accept that
what is now effectively a private Member's Bill will require a great deal more in the way of detailed consideration than that which he has just suggested?
Alun Michael: I wonder whether the hon. Gentleman can put together two words in the correct order: "vote" and "free". The point is that the House of Commons had a free vote. My understanding is that it was a free vote on the Opposition side of the House as well, but they seem not to understand the nature of the word. This remains a Government Bill. It was the Government who introduced it and who created the opportunity for Members of this House to vote on it. It leaves here as a Government Bill, with the amendment that was decided on by right hon. and hon. Friends on a free vote last night.
Alun Michael: I give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood (Paddy Tipping).
Paddy Tipping (Sherwood): The House voted last night with a majority of more than 200, and the established will of the Commons is for a total ban on hunting. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we now need to ensure that this matter is finally resolved, and that the voice of the Commons prevails?
Alun Michael: I am certain that Opposition Members will have taken that lesson from my hon. Friend about the implications of last night's vote. We are treating with respect the decision that this House took by introducing amendments, as I promised that we would, to tidy up the Bill in a variety of ways.
Alun Michael: I am spoilt for choice. I give way to the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker).
Gregory Barker (Bexhill and Battle): I thank the Minister for giving way. Can he think of a single precedent on this scale, whereby a Bill has been shredded in the House of Commons, returned to Committee with such indecent haste and bounced out? Can he name a single such precedent?
Alun Michael: There are many precedents in this House for all sorts of things. What we had yesterday was a free vote. This is a Government who are confident enough to allow their Members a free vote on what has been a burning issue in this House for year upon year. It is entirely appropriate for the Government to respect the decision of this House.
Alun Michael: I shall give way to my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman), and then, of course, to the hon. Member for Aldershot (Mr. Howarth).
Mr. Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton): Does my right hon. Friend not agree that the hon. Member for
Mid-Sussex (Mr. Soames) should learn from the lessons not only of history but of family relationships? The original Parliament Act was passed not on manifesto commitments of any kind whatsoever—here, we are in fact talking about a manifesto commitment—but in order to assert in all legislative circumstances the supremacy of the House of Commons. What is more, all that the hon. Gentleman has to do is to read his grandfather's memoirs—assuming, because one cannot remember, that he was a member of the Liberal party at the time.
Alun Michael: I cannot improve on the history lesson that my right hon. Friend has contributed to the House. I now give way to the hon. Member for Aldershot.
Mr. Gerald Howarth (Aldershot): I thank the Minister for giving way. Given that this is a Government Bill, the Prime Minister will presumably be supporting it. Or are tonight's television reports correct in saying that in fact, he wants to disown this nasty, illiberal and prejudiced Bill, which will be resisted by the people of England?
Alun Michael: What a confused statement! The hon. Gentleman obviously does not listen to many of the people of England; otherwise, he would not have made such as biased and ridiculous claim.
Alun Michael: I give way to the hon. Member for Ceredigion (Mr. Thomas).
Mr. Simon Thomas (Ceredigion): I thank the right hon. Gentleman for giving way. He spoke just a few minutes ago about respect for this House. We all recognise that the vote was a free vote and that the House came to a conclusion. However, will he also show some respect to those who took him at face value? When he talked of utility and cruelty, he spoke of two important animal welfare principles that many of us felt could work to the benefit of communities, and particularly to those in upland Wales. Having thrown away that lifeline to those communities, what proposals does the Minister now have to ensure that they are not undermined by last night's decision?
Alun Michael: It is a bit late for a contribution that is really about last night's debate and decision. The hon. Gentleman should recognise that I brought forward proposals to this House in good faith. They were constructed in good faith after a great deal of discussion. I listened to people, including people in his constituency. The House of Commons decided what to do. The House voted as it did, and that should be respected by hon. Members of all parties.
Kate Hoey (Vauxhall): Will my right hon. Friend give way?
Alun Michael: I give way with great pleasure to my hon. Friend.
Kate Hoey : I know that a day is a long time in politics, but my right hon. Friend said last night that he could
not, in all conscience, vote for the full ban on hunting. How can he now, as a Minister, so wholeheartedly ask people to go into Committee and support the Bill?
Alun Michael: I do not think that my hon. Friend has quite understood what happened yesterday. Perhaps a little more history than one day is required. The House of Commons had a choice, and voted. A majority of 209 indicated the nature of the Bill that hon. Members wished to go forward. [Interruption.] As a result—
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst): Order. I suggest that the debate be conducted in a more orderly manner. The Minister will indicate as much if he is prepared to give way, but we do not want half a dozen hon. Members on their feet at the same time. We also want to hear every word that is being said.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |