TEMPORARY PROVISION FOR GOVERNMENT OF NORTHERN IRELAND (Hansard, 15 July 1974)

§ Captain Orr
I beg to move Amendment No. 2, in page 4, line 24, at end insert: 'and no draft of an order shall be brought forward for approval under paragraph (a) above unless and until it has been approved by a Standing Committee established for the purpose' The purpose is plain. It is to avoid the situation that we had under the previous direct rule provisions for dealing with Northern Ireland Orders in Council. There is no need for me to weary the Committee with the long story of the way the last Parliament dealt with the vast amount of legislation introduced by Order in Council, but I will recall to hon. Members briefly that a great deal of legislation—very much of it new and reforming—was on the stocks at Stormont when Stormont was suspended, and that legislation had to be brought before the House of Commons.
The Order in Council system of dealing with Northern Ireland legislation was instituted and proved highly unsatisfactory. It was all right for minor legislation but we had great difficulty, very often late at night, in dealing with highly complex and sometimes massive measures. For example, planning legislation and 134 complex planning procedures went through the House by Order in Council early one morning. What was wrong was not so much the brief time available for debate but the fact that there was no possibility of amending the legislation.
What does the right hon. Gentleman envisage as the kind of legislative programme expected during, say, the next six months? Is there a great deal of legislation awaiting us which would normally have gone to the Assembly? Does it include any matters of great substance? If there be anything like the volume we had during direct rule, or any legislation of comparable importance, there is great force in the amendment. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will not use the argument—

§ Mr. Merlyn Rees
Not any more.

Captain Off
I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman, because there is an excellent answer to that argument. The Secretary of State has been using the argument that it ill becomes those who opted out of the Assembly on detailed discussions of measures in the Assembly to tell the House of Commons now that we ought to have adequate means of debate. It is one thing for Members of the Assembly to decide that the Executive was improperly formed and to have nothing to do with it; it is quite another for hon. Members of this House, in which Northern Ireland is under-represented, to say, when the Secretary of State brings legislation forward, that their electorate should have proper democratic methods of moving and voting on amendments.
Even if the Secretary of State cannot accept the amendment as it stands—as I imagine will be the case—he has already said something on Second Reading, but in rather vague terms. When he was in opposition we got the same kind of vague assurances from the then Leader of the House and in the event they came to nothing. What we want from him is an assurance that when it is in mind that a draft Order in Council will be laid, some means will be found for the elected representatives of Northern Ireland to move and vote on amendments which their constituents think important.
As time goes on, there is bound to be trouble about the legislation which went through this House by the Order in Council procedure. There is no opportunity 135 now, other than new legislation, to put that right. The right hon. Gentleman was sympathetic to this argument when in opposition. We used to operate together in deploring the way in which Northern Ireland business was treated. Now that the mantle of this responsibility has fallen upon him, I hope that he will show that same generosity of spirit.

§ Mr. Merlyn Rees
Hon. Members will know what the order procedure and the urgent procedure entail. We are certainly not faced with the spate of legislation which arose from the Macrory Report, which required large numbers of detailed orders running into many pages. However, before the Summer Recess we shall need an appropriation measure so that Northern Ireland may have some money. I am in a difficult position, but it is in my mind to do this, when the Bill becomes law, by the urgency procedure. I should have thought that few would object to that laudable aim.
I am also of a mind shortly to deal with the question of social security payments during the strike, which the Executive was given permission to make under the 1926 Act. That matter needs to be tidied up and there will have to be an order on that. We certainly need to do something on the pensions increase. There is no great urgency on that, but it will need to be done by 1st January. There was a measure on its way through the Assembly. It was on exactly the same lines as the English Pensions (Increase) Act and dealt with the pensions of people who retired after 1st January. I am sure that the matter is of great urgency to them and I wish to do something about it.
Other legislation on, for example, extraterritorial offences and fair employment will arise. But there is not the great spate of legislation which was involved under the previous administration.

§ Mr. Biggs-Davison
Shall we have a one-and-a-half hour debate on the appropriation measure?

§ Mr. Rees
That would be a matter for the Leader of the House, but the procedures matter would necessitate only a one-and-a-half hour debate—and very quickly in time.

§ Rev. Ian Paisley
I take it that the extra-territorial offences legislation arises from the Law Commission's recommendations and that a Bill will be presented.

§ Mr. Rees
I was asked about the legislation, not the form which it would take. It would require a Bill to be passed through the House of Commons.
I sympathise with and understand what is involved in the amendment, but to regulate the House's procedures through a Bill would be the wrong way to proceed. The matter is normally dealt with through the procedures of the House and the Committees which are set up, and it is much better that the matter should be left in that way. How it should be done is a matter for discussion. However, I feel sure that it would not be appropriate to set up a Committee at the fag end of this Session and that it should be left for later in the year. A marginal thing which could be done is that we could place the draft orders in the Library a little earlier so that people might be aware of what was coming through.
I shall look at the matter most sympathetically. I understand the nature of the problem. I have no idea what events will take place in the autumn, but we should look at the matter when the House returns from the Summer Recess. I do not take precisely the point about the voting procedure and the suggestion that the matter should be voted upon. It would be simple to arrange a Committee in which the vote was always lost. There is nothing clever about that. What matters is that the subject is discussed, and that is what moves me, rather than the question of the voting procedure.
I am aware that now that there is no Assembly meeting there must be appropriate means of discussion, but it is clear that many major measures will not go through in the form of Bills. That is the matter about which hon. Members are concerned.

§ Mr. James Kilfedder (Down, North)
I regard this Bill as a stalling measure. I may be incorrect in saying that, and the Government may be sincere in their intentions. Nevertheless, I cannot see another Assembly being created in Northern Ireland for a considerable time. For that reason, it is vitally important that an Ulster Standing Committee 137 should be created in the House of Commons.
The Secretary of State has said that there is not much Northern Ireland legislation waiting to come forward. The Solicitors (Amendment) Bill went through its Committee stage a short time ago. We have no equivalent measure in Northern Ireland. A Solicitors Bill was being debated in the Northern Ireland Assembly, but it contained no provision for ombudsmen to investigate clients' complaints against solicitors. That measure should be brought quickly before the House, so that Northern Ireland has the benefit of legislation which is available in England. I will not go through the catalogue of legislation, but there is a measure dealing with children which, perhaps not in its present form but in a similar form, should be proceeded with.
It is totally unsatisfactory that we should have to face a long period during which we shall be unable to amend draft Orders in Council. The right hon. Gentleman says that he will place the orders in the Library beforehand, but he will not withdraw a draft order if any right hon. or hon. Member tells him that it is unsatisfactory.

§ Mr. Merlyn Rees
What I said was that in the autumn we shall look seriously at this matter. In the short run, which is a matter of weeks, I shall see whether it is possible to put in the Library beforehand any orders which I lay. That will enable Northern Ireland Members to see what is contained in the orders.

§ Mr. Kilfedder
I accept what the right hon. Gentleman says. I hope that he will consider machinery for the creation of an Ulster Standing Committee to discuss matters which are important to Northern Ireland. We are debating the creation of a constitution for the Province, but the health and prosperity of the Province depend upon legislation which affects Northern Ireland going through this House. We must make sure that reforming legislation brought before the House is debated upstairs.

§ Mr. Dalyell
It is exceedingly unsatisfactory that debates on Northern Ireland often take place late at night. I accept the Secretary of State's view that it is difficult to do anything at the fag end of 138 the Session, but if changes are to be made preparations have to be undertaken soon, and the sooner the Clerks are told that something may be possible the more likely it is to happen.
There is a serious case for a Northern Irish Grand Committee along the lines of the Scottish Grand Committee. Although there are many sneers at the Scottish Grand Committee, on the whole the procedure has few disadvantages and many merits. Irish Members will be aware of the complaints made by colleagues about the amount of the House's time that was taken up by Northern Ireland matters last week and again today. They fairly point out that there has been no proper debate on Kilbrandon, oil policy, reactor choice or the negotiations that the Foreign Secretary is conducting on membership of the EEC. If Ulster affairs are debated properly, the time will come when colleagues will say, understandably, that it is not fair on the rest of the House.
Furthermore, it will be of advantage to Ulster Members to have morning sessions upstairs, because they will then find that, in the nature of Press timings, they will be very much better reported both in evening newspapers and in the Ulster morning papers than they are reported late at night. The arguments about having a Grand Committee on Northern Irish affairs are very seductive.

§ Rev. Ian Paisley
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland had long experience when in opposition of dealing with Orders in Council. On many occasions he told the House how many Orders in Council were outstanding, how many pages they occupied, the number of clauses they contained and the late night sittings involved.
We in Northern Ireland would like to see Northern Irish business worked in the same way as business for any other part of the United Kingdom. We feel that there would be value in having a Standing Committee on Northern Ireland. We pressed the former Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and also the Leader of the House for such a Committee. We were promised time and again that this matter would be looked into and all parties would be consulted. No party from Northern Ireland was consulted, and 139 the proposal died. We never had a Grand Committee for Northern Ireland.
It worries Northern Ireland Members of Parliament that we are not able to amend Orders in Council. Although many aspects of orders may be favourable to Northern Ireland, there are matters on which we receive representations from constituents. The Minister concerned, no matter how favourable he may be towards us, can give us only nice, pious platitudes on Orders in Council, for they must go through as they stand. Therefore, we welcome what the Secretary of State has said and especially the fact that he will look into the matter. We are probably at the end of the present Parliament, and we hope that the right hon. Gentleman will still take that view if he finds himself in his present office on our return or if he is then in opposition.

§ Mr. James Molyneaux (Antrim, South)
Since I have served on the Scottish Grand Committee, my natural affection for Scotland has increased. I can see the value of such a Committee, although at times I may have been regarded by the hon. Member for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell) as an obstructionist in legislation affecting Scotland.

§ Mr. Dalyell
No.

§ Mr. Molyneaux
It was most infuriating when we discussed Orders in Council on planning and on health and social services affecting Northern Ireland to realise that we could not alter by a dot or a comma anything in those measures. Unfortunately, a number of our criticisms expressed in those discussions were later proved to be justified. It looks as though at some time we shall have to find time for amending legislation, Therefore, it would be a step in the right direction if we could have a Committee of sorts and consultation prior to the laying of an order in its final shape.

§ Mr. Merlyn Rees
My hon. Friend the Member for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell) need not encourage Ulster Members to get to the House early in the morning to obtain Press publicity. They are well versed in that art without any need for a change in procedure. I shall take very seriously what has been said in this short discussion, whether in my present office 140 or in any later guise in carrying on my work for Northern Ireland. I will see that this debate is drawn to the notice of my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House straight away.

§ Captain Orr
Although the amendment would be in order if we chose to press it, I take the right hon. Gentleman's point that it is not desirable to alter the procedures of the House by amendment to legislation.
The Secretary of State says that he does not propose to do anything for the fag end of this Session but that when we come back he intends to consider the two problems to which reference has been made: first, the discussion of legislation before it is drafted, and, secondly, the discussion of a draft before an order is laid. We understand that the right hon. Gentleman has in mind some kind of procedure by which hon. Members representing Northern Ireland can be consulted about a draft and asked whether they wish the draft to be amended, and by which we can discuss amendments before the draft comes before the House. I think that is what the right hon. Gentleman has in mind.

§ Mr. Merlyn Rees
I mean what I say. Of course I cannot commit my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House, but this is the view that I shall put forward.

§ Captain Orr
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman. In the light of that, and in the hope that he will also convey to the Leader of the House our views about the times at which we discuss Orders in Council, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.