| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mrs. Hodgson: Will my hon. Friend clarify whether the umbrella definition of emergency workers will include nurses and staff, such as porters, in accident and emergency and other hospital departments?
Fiona Mactaggart: Our aim is to try to construct a simple offence. I have described at length the difficulty if an offence is complicated; for example, where we say, "These people are in but those people are out." In Committee, I hope that we can amend the obstruction provisions so that an emergency service worker responding to an emergency will be covered by the obstruction offence. That is where there is a big gap. A nurse accompanying an emergency team would certainly be covered, but the offence would not be designed for circumstances inside a hospital where it is much easier to control the situation. However, we can examine that point in Committee.
People who go to emergencies to protect us are extremely vulnerable, as Members have made clear. That vulnerability is what we want to deal with; those workers are vulnerable to obstruction and the consequences of obstructing them can be serious. The resources available to workers attending an emergency are not as substantial as those for people treating patients in a hospital; for example, there may be security staff, although it is of course a great pity that most of our A and E departments require security staff. Teams responding to an emergency are very vulnerable and obstruction of them can have serious and substantial consequences. That is the main thing we have to deal with and I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for allowing us to use the Bill to protect people against that obstruction.
The Manchester Evening News campaign and other campaigns across the country show that there is a huge public appetite for dealing with the situation.
Ann Keen: Does my hon. Friend agree that the Bill will also send a message to the relatives of the work force—our heroes? Families know that when someone leaves for work they may be in a very vulnerable position. We are really saying thank you to the family members of emergency services personnel.
Fiona Mactaggart: Absolutely. It is a complete outrage that people who serve the public should be subject to the type of behaviour that has been described in the House today. I shall be proud to work with my right hon. Friend and, I hope, with Members on both sides of the House to make sure that our emergency workers are safer in future.
If we are clear about making a real difference where there is that gap in the law, if we do not over-complicate the issue and if we work with the tools that are already available, we can make those heroes—who save lives and on whom our society depends—safer. If we achieve that, we should all feel proud.
My speech has roamed far, partly because I wanted to be generous about taking interventions, for a particular reason. I hope that we can gain the consent of Members on both sides of the House to enable the Bill to deal with a gap in the law.
3 Mar 2006 : Column 548
Our debate has highlighted the increasing and tragic dangers faced by our emergency workers, but we will do them no favours if we create a law that raises expectations but achieves little in practice because it is flawed. Let us be honest: that has happened before. The Government cannot therefore support the additional, not necessary, offence of assault. The law already exists to pursue a range of assault offences, and to create specific offences would make for complicated law, which risks having unintended consequences. Sentencing guidelines ensure that the courts must hand out tougher sentences for those whose victims are serving the public.
I have outlined the non-legislative measures whereby we can deal with these offences and, we hope, prevent them from happening in the first place. However, there is a gap in the law in relation to obstructing an emergency worker. There is no offence of obstruction in relation to ambulance workers, and I have been able to show the House that the present offence in relation to firefighters does not work as well as we would wish. I am therefore glad that my right hon. Friend has agreed that he will introduce amendments to deal with this issue in Committee and I look forward to working in Committee with him, and with Members across the House, to bring back on Report a Bill that deals with less but deals with it well. When we come to do that, we can all feel very proud of ourselves indeed and we can ensure that those people, those heroes, upon whom we depend for our lives, will be safer in future.
I am pleased to support the Bill.
12.46 pm
Mr. Alan Williams: With the leave of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I shall make a few brief comments. First, I thank everyone who took part in this morning's debate for the very positive way in which it was conducted. I hope and believe that a clear message will go out from the speeches that, regardless of party, in all parts of the House there is enormous respect and regard for our emergency services, and a determination that they shall get the protection they need.
Secondly, it has been worth being here to be a witness to the most unexpected marriage of minds between the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) and the Minister. I advise her not to be dazzled by his charismatic style; he can be a fickle fellow, and I must tell her that I am not optimistic for the survival of the relationship.
I thank the Minister for trying to meet my concerns. I will read in detail what she has said and we shall liaise between now and Committee to work out appropriate amendments to achieve what the House obviously wants.
I thank the sponsors of the Bill, particularly the hon. Member for Teignbridge (Richard Younger-Ross), who provided me with the original idea arising from the Scottish Bill, and my hon. Friends the Members for Islington, South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry) and for Hendon (Mr. Dismore), who made up for my legal inadequacies by joining me at consultations with Ministers and explaining to me what they were talking about.
It is not often that we in the House praise the press, but the Manchester Evening News has been ahead of all the press in this country in campaigning for months,
3 Mar 2006 : Column 549
absolutely consistently, in support of the emergency workers. I want the newspaper to know that that is recognised in the House. Other hon. Members have said the same.
Finally, there is one person to whom I want to pay particular tribute—Barry Dixon of the Manchester fire service, who, on behalf of all the emergency services, led not only in briefing me but in supporting me as I worked on the Bill.
Bill accordingly read a Second time, and committed to a Standing Committee, pursuant to Standing Order No. 63 (Committal of Bills).
Mr. Tobias Ellwood (Bournemouth, East) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Today's Order Paper says that there are four written ministerial statements. I understand that three of them have already made their way to the Library, but the fourth—probably the most important of the four—on police force restructuring has yet to do so. May I seek your guidance on the reason for any delay?
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Michael Lord): I understand that that statement is due to be put before the House today. I have no knowledge about when it will be produced, but it should be before the House today, and I trust that that will be the case.
3 Mar 2006 : Column 550
Telecommunications Masts (Planning Control) Bill
Order for Second Reading read.
12.50 pm
Mr. David Curry (Skipton and Ripon) (Con): I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, the hon. Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart), who is just leaving the Chamber, said of the Emergency Workers (Protection) Bill, which we have just debated—at a length that occasionally made me feel that curling offered unexpected excitements, after watching it during the Olympic games—that she did not like the Bill and it was unnecessary, but none the less she was willing to discuss it in Committee, because she thought that it could be a vehicle to make some useful amendments to the law.
I hope that the Minister who will deal with this Bill and I can negotiate on exactly the same basis. I expect him not to endorse my Bill, but to acknowledge that there are some serious difficulties with the way in which the system operates now. Therefore, let us find a means to discuss that together, so that people can feel that a transparent process is taking place, which will lead to the calming of some people's fears and passions.
Emily Thornberry (Islington, South and Finsbury) (Lab): There is huge support for the right hon. Gentleman's Bill from all sorts of quarters. A large number of my constituents believe that they are affected by such masts, and they certainly want the law to be changed to protect schoolchildren. So I have come here to support his Bill.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |