UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT

HOUSE OF COMMONS

REPRESENTATIONS MADE BEFORE THE

BACKBENCH BUSINESS COMMITTEE

BACKBENCH BUSINESS

STEPHEN LLOYD, MRS LOUISE ELLMAN, GRAHAM EVANS, MR STEPHEN O'BRIEN and MR JAMES CLAPPISON

USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT

Representations made before the

Backbench Business Committee

on Tuesday 17 December 2013

Members present:

Natascha Engel (Chair)

Mr David Amess

Bob Blackman

John Hemming

Pete Wishart

Stephen Lloyd, Mrs Louise Ellman, Graham Evans, Mr Stephen O'Brien and Mr James Clappison made representations.

Q1 Chair: Thank you very much for coming. You are here to make a bid for the annual Holocaust memorial day debate.

Stephen Lloyd: That is correct. Thank you very much, Madam Chair; it is good to be here. I know that you know the issue very well, so I will not patronise the Committee by going into all the detail of why it is important, although there are some points I would like to flag up. The debate started in 2008 and has historically been held in the week before Holocaust memorial day, so what we are seeking, if possible, is a debate in the Chamber in the week commencing 20 January. Monday 27 January is Holocaust memorial day. The debate has been held every year since 2008, other than in 2011, when our colleague John Mann requested a debate on anti-Semitism, which took place the week before Holocaust memorial day.

The debate is usually held in the main Chamber and is very well attended. I have spoken in the last three debates, since the election, and it is always well attended, usually with about 60 or 70 people, which is why we seek, if possible, a debate in the main Chamber. The historical reasons we all know very well, but another important point is that having the debate in the House has now become an important part of the whole commemoration of the issue over that week. That is why we are requesting a debate in the main Chamber, if at all possible. This is also obviously a cross-party request, so perhaps my colleagues, Louise or Graham, would like to add something.

Mrs Ellman: I would like to support what has been said and to add that Holocaust memorial day is a national event. It is now firmly established in the national calendar and it is right that there is a debate here in Parliament. It gives Members of all parties from across the House the opportunity to discuss the implications of the holocaust and also more recent horrific happenings. The experience of recent years shows that the debate is widely supported-Members come from all parties and all parts of the country. It is very valuable debate.

Q2 Chair: You have said that 60 to 70 Members participate in the debate, yet you have requested only one and a half hours in the Chamber, which obviously would not be enough.

Stephen Lloyd: I could probably rephrase that a wee bit better. What I remember is that that number turn up, but not all of them speak, or they just intervene. Frankly, I think this issue could sustain a three-hour debate, but because it has historically been one and a half hours, that is what we are asking for. Certainly as many as that turn up, but not all of them speak.

Q3 Chair: We will check this, but I am sure that it was always a three-hour or half-day debate.

Stephen Lloyd: The notes I have from the Holocaust Educational Trust said it was one and a half hours, but maybe we can check that.

Q4 Chair: Okay, we will have a look at that.

Obviously we work only a couple of weeks ahead of ourselves, with what the Government allocate us, but we anticipate that we will usually have Thursdays. The Thursday of that week is 23 January, so the debate would not take place on Holocaust memorial day itself.

Stephen Lloyd: That would be absolutely suitable.

Graham Evans: I have just come from seeing Show Racism the Red Card over in Portcullis House. There is racism still in football, for example, against black players. That is an important issue which is well known, but anti-Semitism is still rife out there, and perhaps sometimes we need to remind people that it is still going on.

Q5 Bob Blackman: I would like to correct just one thing. As I recall, I think last year the debate was held in Westminster Hall, not in the main Chamber.

Stephen Lloyd: I thought it was.

Bob Blackman: No, I am sure it wasn’t, because I definitely took part in the debate.

Stephen Lloyd: So did I, but it’s all blur-I was so overwhelmed by what you said.

Q6 Bob Blackman: There you are, you see, and I think it might well have been held in Westminster Hall in previous years as well. That is not to say that the debate should or should not be in the main Chamber, but I think we should check the record.

Stephen Lloyd: I will check it.

Chair: For the record, it was definitely in the Chamber last time, but it has previously been in Westminster Hall. The way it has been done previously has depended on what we have on in the Chamber at the time-it was in Westminster Hall simply because something else was happening at the same time.

Q7 John Hemming: Going by what has been said previously, are you saying that you would prefer the Chamber, but would not refuse Westminster Hall?

Stephen Lloyd: No, we would not refuse it, but we would prefer the Chamber, although that is clearly at the discretion of the Committee.

Q8 Chair: Okay. Can I bring you in, Mr O’Brien?

Mr O'Brien: Thank you, Chair; I am sorry that I was a bit late. Alistair Burt asked me to attend because he cannot. He and I very much support the application for this debate. There are two reasons why I think it is particularly timely. It would be an opportunity to look back and celebrate the work of the Holocaust Educational Trust, in which I participated recently. It is now gathering numbers; in particular, it takes sixth formers from its area, which is noteworthy and we should give publicity to.

The second reason is that the debate memorialises not just the second world war holocaust, but all holocausts. There is not only the historic Rwandan genocide, but things that are moving most unhappily in Africa at the moment. Although it is premature to speak of genocide in the Central African Republic, despite some loose talk, it is helpful to note that we are conscious of the conditions and historical lessons that we can draw from the past.

Mr Clappison: I very much support the application and I agree with what has just been said. It seems to me that there is a growing interest among young people in the holocaust and a growing recognition that we need to warn about similar problems in the world today and more recent examples of holocaust. I strongly believe that the debate should be held in the Chamber. That would be fitting because the Chamber of the House of Commons is in many ways the antithesis of the forces that led to the holocaust. It is a fitting place for the debate.

Chair: This is the only application for today, so we will go into private session now and then let you know our decision.

Q9 Bob Blackman: By the time we allow for a 10-minute lead-off speech, 10 minutes for the Opposition and 10 minutes for the Government, only an hour will be left for anyone else to make a speech if the debate is to be an hour and a half long. That is basically five minutes each for 12 people. May I suggest that you assemble a rough list of speakers who wish to participate? We might then consider a three-hour debate.

Stephen Lloyd: We will do that. Chair, do you need that before Christmas or after?

Chair: It will be all right after Christmas because we will not be announcing anything for several weeks.

Stephen Lloyd: That is a good idea, Bob. We will get that list for you early in the new year, Chair.

Chair: Excellent. Thank you very much, and happy Christmas.