British Fishing Boats Bill (Hansard, 7 March 1983)

§ Mr. Buchan
On a point of order, Mr. Dean. We probably spent longer on Second Reading than we expected, because many serious and important matters arose during our debate. I am not pressing for any change in the agreement that has been made, but I wish to ask some questions about the selection of amendments.
If we had not proceeded immediately to the Committee stage, time would have been available for discussions with the Government, who might have decided to follow the course outlined in some Opposition amendments and might have altered the long title, which would have facilitated matters.
As the Bill has been seen to be more important in many respects than was realised by the Minister of State and others, especially in relation to the Merchant Shipping Acts, should not we enhance the Bill, which was seen only as a temporary expedient, pending an expansion of the Common Market, by enabling a discussion of the amendments that would utilise the measure to introduce means of improving the condition, security and well-being of our fishermen with the same sort of speed with which other parts of the Bill have been dealt?
Could we either suspend the sitting for a short time or make a decision now to enable amendments Nos. 1 and 2 and any associated amendments to the long title to be discussed? The whole fishing industry would endorse such a proposition.

§ Mr. Buchanan-Smith
Further to that point of order, Mr. Dean. The hon. Member for Renfrewshire, West (Mr. Buchan) has a right to raise matters that go wider than the Bill and you have to answer questions about the selection of amendments, but I must point out to the Committee and to the hon. Gentleman, who admitted that he had agreed to expedite the Bill's passage and that his remarks should not be construed as an attempt to delay the measure, that the agreement about the passage of the Bill related to the narrow purpose of the measure, which is to deal with a specific problem of third country vessels fishing in British waters off our south-west coast. If we acceded to the hon.
675 Gentleman's request we should be breaching the arrangements that have been made about proceedings on the Bill.

The Second Deputy Chairman
I am bound by the resolution passed by the House this afternoon. Having disposed of the money resolution, we had to proceed to the Committee stage.
It is not customary for the Chair to give reasons for the non-selection of amendments, but, if it will help the hon. Member for Renfrewshire, West (Mr. Buchan), I can tell him that amendments Nos. 1 and 2 were not selected because they are outside the scope of the Bill. I should add that the manuscript amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Grimsby (Mr. Mitchell) has not been selected.

§ Mr. McNamara
I wonder, Mr. Dean, if you will bear in mind the problems of Members, who are concerned with specific issues of constituency and other interest, when they are faced on a Friday afternoon with motions appearing for the first time on the Order Paper saying that amendments, fresh schedules and new clauses to a Bill will all be taken immediately after Second Reading. With the length of time that has been given, the opportunity to discuss matters properly with outside interests is lost to Back Benchers. This measure has been on the stocks for a long time. It did not need the degree of precipitation that the Government have seen fit to give it this evening. It could easily have been spaced out over a few days and all hon. Members would have had an opportunity to say their piece and to explore the ramifications of the Bill without being pushed into this embarrassing position today.

The Second Deputy Chairman
This is not a matter for the Chair. I cannot help the hon. Gentleman, but perhaps I can point out that we have had a wide-ranging Second Reading debate, which has enabled hon. Members on both sides of the House to make the type of speech that they might have made in Committee had their amendments been selected.