§ Mr. MikardoI beg to move Amendment No. 50, in page 9, line 17, leave out subsection (1) and insert:
(1) This Act shall expire six months after the date of its coming into force unless continued for a further period of not more than six months by an Order under this section.".Although I am only now moving this amendment, there have already been a number of powerful and cogent speeches made in favour of it during the hours which have passed since four o'clock this afternoon. As might be expected, one of the most cogent, powerful and weighty speeches was made by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.Throughout the day hon. Members have repeatedly said, "We must have this legislation, but we hate it. Bearing in mind that we hate it, we have made 581 it temporary." On an earlier amendment I suggested that the matter under discussion was a test of the sincerity of these protestations. This is an even sharper test. If hon. Members hate the legislation and put up with it only because it is temporary, they should make it as temporary as is reasonably possible.
How temporary is temporary? The French have a saying c'est seuletnent le provisoire qui dure—it is only the temporary which goes on. That happens in too many walks of life.
If we—not least my right hon. Friend—believe what we have been saying—that we are striving to hold a balance between security and civil liberty and to ensure that there shall not be arbitrary power in the hands of the Executive—we should be willing to require the Executive, when we give them these extraordinary and unpleasant powers, to come back and ask for the renewal of their mandate, and to do so frequently. We ought not to create a situation in which the Bill can continue without a renewal of the mandate for a longer period than its precedessor.
If at the end of six months it is found that the Bill is necessary, that it is working properly and is beneficial in operation, my right hon. Friend will have no difficulty in getting this House to renew his mandate. This House is a reasonable place. It acts along the lines of practicality almost all the time. However, the danger of these powers being used arbitrarily increases the longer they can be used without being accounted for. The essence of the rights of the citizen is the public accountability of the Executive for the way in which it uses the powers given by Parliament.
If the Home Secretary means all that he has said today, he cannot possibly resist the amendment. If he does so, then, without any disrespect to my right hon. Friend, we shall find room for doubt about whether he regards this sort of legislation, with its blanket powers, as objectionable as he claims.
§ Mr. BeithA Liberal amendment is linked with that which is under discussion. It is not as far reaching, but it includes a six-month review. The Home Secretary said an hour or so ago that he was anxious that the powers in the Bill should be as temporary as possible, and 582 I think that that is the general view in the House. However, it is not generally understood outside, and I have had many representations from people concerned about civil liberties who increasingly believe that there is some intent to have permanent legislation. I have sought to reassure them, because I do not believe that this is the intention of the House or of the Home Secretary. I have no doubt that the right hon. Gentleman is entirely true to himself. But when he says that he wishes the legislation to be temporary and to be seen to be temporary, I have to tell him that it is not so seen outside this House.
I do not expect the problem of terrorism to go away within six months. If anything, I am less optimistic than the Home Secretary about how long we shall be faced with this problem. I believe that we shall have problems of terrorism, small or large, for very many years. Some may not be associated with Northern Ireland and will not come within the ambit of this Bill. Even if we are successful beyond our wildest dreams in achieving a political settlement in Northern Ireland that is calculated to reduce terrorism, the settlement will be against the interests of some people and they might well use violent means in an attempt to destroy it.
The basis of this legislation is that it involves temporary provisions which are seen, at this moment, as being helpful to the authorities in dealing with terrorism as it manifests itself now. The nature of the proposals, the way in which they have been conceived and described as temporary during detailed discussion of their features, all bear out the fact that they would need to be re-assessed if terrorism continued for some time. However, the character of terrorism may change and other temporary provisions may be necessary. The nature of the legislation is impermanent so the procedure by which the House enacts it should make sure that it is temporary.
There are clear advantages in a six-month review. The last Bill was subject to a renewal order after six months and another after 12 months. At that stage, the Home Secretary made it clear that he would be seeking new legislation, which is what we are discussing now. One of the advantages of a six-month 583 review which might not have been apparent at that time is that we can draw attention to shortcomings in an Act's operation and point out features which ought to be amended after 12 months. The desirability of renewal can be challenged and hon. Members can point out shortcomings in areas where amendments are needed—even though they may not be sufficient justification for refusing renewal.
It might be supposed that this is unnecessary because after 12 months these matters could be drawn to the attention of the Home Secretary. But the pressure of business in this place is such that when legislation has to be reconsidered within a limited period, things such as I am referring to are not forgotten but are left on one side until it is almost too late to deal with them properly at a later stage.
The Home Secretary should not underestimate the advantages of a six-month review. I hope that he will therefore be sympathetic to the amendments.
§ Dr. SummerskillThe amendments would make the temporary provisions subject to renewal at least every six months rather than every 12 months as provided by the Bill. Under the 1974 Act the maximum renewal period is six
§ months, but that period is extended to 12 months by the Bill because the Bill offers the opportunity to consider in detail the form which temporary provisions legislation of this kind should take. The extensive consideration to which this Bill has been subjected was not possible with the 1974 legislation, which was passed in a state of gross emergency. The House has considered this Bill throughout all its stages in far more detail than was possible with the 1974 Act.
It would be rash to predict for how long temporary provisions of this kind will be necessary. Recent events have shown that it is unlikely that we shall be able to let the powers lapse in the very near future. The provisions are temporary, but as the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) said, the problem of terrorism may not be so temporary. A renewal period of up to 12 months is therefore considered appropriate.
We hope that when the Bill is enacted it will be thought safe to operate 12-monthly renewal. The flexibility to renew the provisions for periods of less than 12 months is retained.
§ Question put, That the amendment be made:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 31, Noes 105.
585| Division No. 46.] | AYES | [11.28 p.m. |
| Beith, A. J. | Lamond, James | Smith, Cyril (Rochdale) |
| Bennett, Andrew (Stockport N) | Latham, Arthur (Paddington) | Steel, David (Roxburgh) |
| Bidwell, Sydney | Litterick, Tom | Thomas, Ron (Bristol NW) |
| Canavan, Dennis | McGuire, Michael (Ince) | Thorne, Stan (Preston South) |
| Cook, Robin F. (Edin C) | Madden, Max | Thorpe, Rt Hon Jeremy (N Devon) |
| Cryer, Bob | Newens, Stanley | Wigley, Dafydd |
| Evans, Gwynfor (Carmarthen) | Noble, Mike | Wise, Mrs Audrey |
| Fitt, Gerard (Belfast W) | Parry, Robert | |
| Flannery, Martin | Penhaligon, David | TELLERS FOR THE AYES: |
| Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) | Rooker, J. W. | Mr. Ian Mikado and |
| Howells, Geraint (Cardigan) | Ross, Stephen (Isle of Wight) | Mr. Robin Corbett. |
| Kilfedder, James | Skinner, Dennis | |
| NOES | ||
| Alison, Michael | Cunningham, G. (Islington S) | Graham, Ted |
| Archer, Peter | Deakins, Eric | Harrison, Walter (Wakefield) |
| Armstrong, Ernest | Dempsey, James | Henderson, Douglas |
| Ashton, Joe | Doig, Peter | Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N) |
| Bain, Mrs Margaret | Dormand, J. D. | Hunter, Adam |
| Bates, Alf | Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James | Jackson, Miss Margaret (Lincoln) |
| Biggs-Davison, John | Dunn, James A. | James, David |
| Bishop, E. S. | Eadie, Alex | Jenkins, Rt Hon Roy (Stechford) |
| Blenkinsop, Arthur | Ellis, John (Brigg & Scun) | Johnson, James (Hull West) |
| Bradford, Rev Robert | Ellis, Tom (Wrexham) | Judd, Frank |
| Bray, Dr Jeremy | Evans, Ioan (Aberdare) | Knight, Mrs Jill |
| Brown, Hugh D. (Provan) | Evans, John (Newton) | Lawrence, Ivan |
| Carson, John | Ewing, Harry (Stirling) | Le Merchant, Spencer |
| Cartwright, John | Eyre, Reginald | Lester, Jim (Beeston) |
| Chalker, Mrs Lynda | Fernyhough, Rt Hn E. | Lestor, Miss Joan (Eton & Slough) |
| Cocks. Michael (Bristol S) | George, Bruce | Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) |
| Crawsha[...], Richard | Golding, John | Lyons, Edward (Bradford W) |
| McCartney, Hugh | Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn (Leeds S) | Tinn, James |
| McCusker, H. | Reid, George | Wainwright, Edwin (Dearne V) |
| McElhone, Frank | Roderick, Caerwyn | Walker, Terry (Kingswood) |
| Mackenzie, Gregor | Rodgers, George (Chorley) | Ward, Michael |
| Mackintosh, John P. | Ross, Rt Hon W. (Kilmarnock) | Watt, Hamish |
| McNair-Wilson, P. (New Forest) | Ross, William (Londonderry) | Welsh, Andrew |
| Mahon, Simon | Rowlands, Ted | White, Frank R. (Bury) |
| Marks, Kenneth | Shepherd, Colin | Whitelaw, Rt Hon William |
| Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole) | Small, William | Whitlock, William |
| Millan, Bruce | Smith, John (N Lanarkshire) | Wilson, Gordon (Dundee E) |
| Mitchell, R. C. (Soton, Itches) | Spriggs, Leslie | Winterton, Nicholas |
| Molyneaux, James | Stewart, Donald (Western Isles) | Woodall, Alec |
| Monro, Hector | Stewart, Rt Hon M. (Fulham) | Woof, Robert |
| Moyle, Roland | Stoddart, David | Wrigglesworth, Ian |
| Murray, Rt Hon Ronald King | Stradling Thomas, J. | |
| Oakes, Gordon | Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley | TELLERS FOR THE NOES. |
| Park, George | Taylor, Mrs Ann (Bolton W) | Mr. James Hamilton and |
| Pavitt, Laurie | Taylor, Teddy (Cathcart) | Mr. Joseph Harper. |
| Powell, Rt Hon J. Enoch | Thatcher, Rt Hon Margaret | |
| Rathbone, Tim | Tierney, Sydney |
§ Question accordingly negatived.
§
Amendment proposed: No. 49, in page 9, line 17, leave out from 'The' to end of line 21 and insert:
'provisions of—
sections 1 to 10 and sections (orders excluding persons from Northern Ireland), (contributions towards acts of terrorism) and (information about acts of terrorism) of this Act,
section 11 of this Act except in so far as it relates to orders under subsection (2)(a) or (b) below,
subsection (2)(c) below, and,
Schedules 1 to 3 to this Act'.—[Dr. Summerskill.]
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Myer Galpern)With this we shall take Government Amendments Nos. 52, 53 and 54. We shall also take the following Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Cunningham):
No. 57, in page 9, line 36, at end insert:'(3) This Act, and any order made under this section for the continuance in force or revival of any of its provisions, shall cease to have effect four years after the passing of this Act'.We shall also take sub-amendment (a) to Amendment No. 57, standing in the name of the hon. Member for Bethnal Green and Bow (Mr. Mikardo), leave out 'four' and insert 'two'
§ Mr. George CunninghamI thank the Government for taking account in their amendment of the substance of the points I made in Committee, but I think they have lost some of the advantage of the particular way of doing it which I have proposed in Amendment No. 57.
First, it will mean that even if there is a need to retain these special powers for year after year after year, by the Government's method of dealing with it 586 we shall never have to have further legislation. If, for example, we need to have this kind of provision for a period of five or ten years, by the way in which the Government have done this job there will never be any need for the Government to come back to the House and to ask it to provide further legislation. It will always be possible to extend the powers merely by order. By my amendment, on the other hand, after four years—that figure could have been changed and extended if necessary—it would be necessary for the House, in legislative form—in Standing Committee and so on—to go through the subject again.
I accept that we do not want to have to legislate again every year on this subject. Some of my hon. Friends may object to that statement, but to legislate every year in present circumstances is quite unnecessary. I also think that, if Draconian powers of this nature—and everyone agrees that they are Draconian—are to remain in force for many years, every few years the House ought to go through its legislative process, and not only the renewal process which is provided by the Government's way of doing it.
Even now, I ask the Government to reconsider that point in the remaining stages of the Bill in the other place, and if the Government are not minded to do it, I would ask the Members of the other place to give it very serious consideration.
I accept that my amendment is defective, in that if the present Bill were allowed to lapse in toto, without exception, automatically the 1974 Act would again come into force, and it would have 587 been necessary, therefore, to correct my amendment in order to save Clause 15 of the Bill, so that we did not automatically revive the previous Act in allowing the present one to lapse. But, subject to that change only, my method of doing it is a much more parliamentary one than that proposed by the Government, and I am sorry that they cannot agree to make that small change in the substantive move which they have agreed to make.
§ Mr. MikardoThe arguments just used by my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Cunningham) were powerful and convincing. They become, by the laws of algebra, twice as powerful and twice as convincing if the temporariness which my hon. Friend seeks, without recourse to the legislation, is made twice as temporary, that is to say, is halved in length. It is on those grounds that my hon. Friends and I have ventured to put down the sub-amendment to my hon. Friend's amendment.
§ Dr. SummerskillThe Government's amendments are designed to ensure that the powers in the Bill could not be reactivated by order after a long period during which the Act lay dormant but remained on the statute book.
We have looked carefully at the drafting of Clause 14, particularly in response to a point raised in Committee by my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Cunningham). He expressed concern that the drafting of the existing Clause 14 creates the possibility that any powers in the Act which were allowed to lapse could be reactivated at any time in the future—for instance, even after an interval of 50 years—for a period of not more than 12 months at a time, provided that the Act was still on the statute book.
It can be argued that, if at some distant time in the future, powers of the kind conferred in the Bill are thought necessary, the correct way to proceed will be by a new Bill rather than by reactivation of the present Bill. We agree with this, but it is also essential to retain the flexibility to reactivate the powers fairly urgently if the need to do so arises. This is not only to ensure that prompt action can be taken if events require it but also to avoid the position in which, 588 although there was no immediate need for such powers, it was difficult to dispense with them because one could not be satisfied that there would be no further urgent need for them.
The first of these amendments, therefore, includes in the list of temporary provisions which must be renewed, at least every 12 months, the reactivation power itself. Thus, while the flexibility of renewing each of the powers separately is retained, the House will be able to make a decision at least every 12 months on whether it is right to retain the power to reactivate the Bill in the future should any of its provisions be allowed to lapse.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Amendments made: No. 52, in page 9, line 24, leave out 'this section' and insert 'subsection (2)(a) below'.
§
No. 53, in page 9, line 26, leave out
'provisions of those sections and Schedules'
and insert 'said provisions'.
No. 54, in page 9, line 28, leave out 'section' and insert
'paragraph or paragraph (c) below'—[Dr. Summerskill.]
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. George Thomas)Does the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Cunningham) wish to move formally Amendment No. 57?
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerThen Amendment No. 57 falls.