§ 9.59 p.m.
§ Mr. PrittI beg to move, in page 5, line 10, to leave out "two years," and to insert "one year."
It is one of the excuses, if I may so call them, for this Bill that it is purely temporary, and everybody hopes that the trouble will be long over past within two years or even one year. As it is so very exceptional a matter, I submit that it would be very much better that we should show that we are not unduly perturbed by these matters, and that this Measure 1597 is very temporary, by making its duration one year only. If at the end of the year there is still trouble, the Government will then have to put it in the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill.
§ 10.0 p.m.
§ Mr. FootI hope the Government will see their way to accept this Amendment. It would be a simple matter, if they found it necessary, to put the Bill in the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill. If the Amendment were accepted, at least it would mean that at the end of 12 months we should certainly have an opportunity of reviewing in this House the whole operation of the Bill. I know that an Amendment has been accepted under which a report is to be made to this House every three months as to the number of persons who have been dealt with under the Measure. That does not take us very far, because, of course, the number of occasions which we shall have for discussing these reports will be limited, and the reports may not tell us a great deal, but if this were carried, it would mean that at the end of 12 months we could have a full discussion on the way in which these exceptional powers have worked. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman who is responsible for the Bill regrets having to ask for powers of this kind, and he would not have done so but for these exceptional circumstances. I think it would help to reconcile many of us to the fact that these powers have to be given if they could be passed only for the shortest possible time.
§ 10.2 p.m.
§ Mr. MaxtonI would like to associate myself with this Amendment and to appeal strongly to the Home Secretary. I think it would be the general view of the Committee that if this Bill has not produced its results at the end of 12 months, it is not a case of asking for its continuance for another 12 months. Obviously, it is then up to the Home Secretary and to this House to devise some other way of dealing with the problem. Therefore, a 12-months duration for this particular Measure seems to me to be completely adequate and, indeed, more than enough. Members will look forward with very great hope, although many doubts have been expressed to the Home Secretary, that these additional powers will have put a stop to this sort of thing in much less than 12 months, 1598 but if they have not done so then, it is no good continuing the powers, and the right hon. Gentleman will have to get something else.
§ 10.3 p.m.
§ Sir S. HoareI think the Committee ought to remember, first of all, that the powers in this Bill will be exercised only if they are needed. If it is found that the terrorists' attempts are coming to an end, and that we have succeeded in a short time in getting rid of the most dangerous conspirators, quite obviously the powers will tend to diminish and fade out altogether. It will come to this, that the powers in the Bill will be exercised only if they are needed. Secondly, the Committee ought to remember, as the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Foot) has just reminded us, that I have undertaken to make a periodical report to the House on the cases of deportation. Taking these two facts into account, I think the Committee have every necessary safeguard against the powers in this Bill being exercised in an abusive way, or being exercised for a longer period than they are needed. I further think that I should be misleading the Committee tonight if I told them that we could safely reduce the duration of this Measure to 12 months. I hope we shall get level with the danger during 12 months. I do not wish to be either sanguine or pessimistic, but looking at the gravity of the problem with which we are faced, I think two years is the minimum that the Committee ought to put in the Bill today, taking the assurance from me that these powers will not be exercised a day longer than they are actually required.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ 10.5 p.m.
§ Mr. FootI wonder whether the Attorney-General could clear up a point that was raised earlier by the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for North Hammersmith (Mr. Pritt) as to the duration of orders. The hon. and learned Gentleman expressed the view that, although the Act might come to an end in two years, nevertheless orders made under it would continue. I do not know whether the Attorney-General has had time further to consider the matter. If so, perhaps he would enlighten us.
§ The Attorney-GeneralI think it is clear that an order ceases to be of effect when the Act comes to an end. There cannot be an order under an Act which has come to an end.
§ Mr. FootClause 2 says:
Any person on whom notice of an expulsion order or of a prohibition order made against him has been served shall leave Great Britain in accordance with the requirements specified in the notice.It might conceivably happen that one of the requirements specified in the notice would be a time limit. If the Attorney-General says that is not the intention, I accept it, but a time limit might be included there and the time might ran beyond the duration of the Act.
§ The Attorney-GeneralAs I read the Bill, an order cannot be an order for a specific period. It is an order which, on the face of it, would not name a period. It remains in force until revoked by an order made in like manner under Clause I (6). Therefore, when the Act comes to an end, the order ceases to be in force. …Clause 2 (i) says:
and shall thereafter while the order is in force remain outside Great Britain.
§ Mr. GallacherThen are we to understand that the position is that a person who is ordered to leave the country and does not go can be sentenced to five years' imprisonment but, if he does go, he is only put out of the country for two years and at the end of two years he can come back again?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI have stated the position as clearly as I can. I do not think there is any point in stating it again.
§ Mr. GallacherI think it ought to be clearly stated that people who are deported are deported for two years, and that at the end of two years they will be permitted to come back.