Abortion (Amendment) Bill (Hansard, 6 May 1988)

§ Ms. Dawn Primarolo (Bristol, South)
I wish to present a petition signed by more than 1,300 of my constituents in connection with this morning's proposed business. It arises from their deep concern about the proposals in the Abortion (Amendment) Bill as it would threaten women and endanger their health.
The petition reads: To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit of abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.

§ Mrs. Alice Mahon (Halifax)
I want to present a petition from the men and women in my constituency who have shown their deep concern about the effects that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill will have on women.
Two of the signatories have a special concern. One is a victime of rape, and the other the son of a woman convicted for illegal abortions before the enactment of the Abortion Act 1967. The petition reads: To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.

§ Mr. Kevin Barron (Rother Valley)
I wish to present a petition from several hundred of my constituents and others from south Yorkshire in relation to the Abortion (Amendment) Bill. There is deep concern in my constituency about the Bill, and I want to read the contents of the petition to the House——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will bear in mind what I said earlier.

§ Mr. Barron
The petition reads: To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable. House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.

§ Ms. Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent, North)
I rise to present a petition on behalf of my constituents and people living in Talke Pits, Norton, Kidsgrove and Tunstall to express the deep concern felt in my constituency about the uncertain dangers to health that will arise if the Abortion (Amendment) Bill is passed today.
The petition reads: 1146 To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.

§ Mrs. Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley)
I rise to present a petition on behalf of my constituents in Cynon Valley, several thousands of whom have written to me in opposition to the Abortion (Amendment) Bill. They are very concerned that the proponents of the Bill give a distorted impression of British abortion law, which is one of the least liberal in Europe. They believe that the way to reduce the number of late abortions is to improve the availability and acceptability of NHS abortion services, to increase contraceptive provision for young people, to offer realistic sex and family life education in schools and to develop more sensitive techniques for the diagnosis of foetal abnormality.
The petition reads: To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.

§ Ms. Mildred Gordon (Bow and Poplar)
I wish to present a petition from more than 200 men and women from my constituency and from elsewhere in east London and one other from south London.
My constituents are very concerned about the danger to the law as it stands contained in the Abortion (Amendment) Bill with regard to women's health and choice. The petition reads: To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.

§ Mr. Harry Cohen (Leyton)
I rise to present a petition signed by a number of my constituents about the business before the House today—the Abortion (Amendment) Bill. It has been collected by the "Fight Alton's Bill" campaign of the Polytechnic of Central London students' union. It has a number of sponsors, including Members of the House and important people throughout the community, as well as many important organisations, among them trade unions and women's organisations, the TUC and, incidentally, Liberal Women for Choice.
My constituents are very worried about the effect of the Bill on women's health and rights. They say: The Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choice, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill. 1147 The first signature is that of Jan Tallis, chair of the women's equality sub-committee.

§ Mr. Dave Nellist (Coventry, South-East)
I rise to present a petition from my constituents which opposes the attempts of the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) to weaken the provisions of the Abortion Act 1967. The petition alleges that The Abortion (Amendment) Bill … will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. The petition has 54 signatures, and was delivered to me late on Wednesday evening. This is my first and most appropriate opportunity to present it to the House. Although it is not the largest petition that I have presented, it is three or four times more substantial than the number of letters and postcards in support of the Bill that I received while it was in Committee.
The petition concludes: Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill. I fully support the petition, and only wish that this morning we were discussing a reduction in abortions through improved National Health Service provision.

§ Mrs. Rosie Barnes (Greenwich)
I have the honour to present a petition on behalf of several hundred of my constituents. It is headed "Fight Alton's Bill", and states: To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.

§ Ms. Jo Richardson (Barking)
I beg to present a petition on behalf of several hundred of my constituents. I should like to say in its support that it has been collected in rain and in shine, at street corners and on Saturday mornings, and it is the only voice that women in my constituency can have in the House today. It states: To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill. I applaud that sentiment, and support the petition.

Several Hon. Members
rose——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The first group of amendments——

Several Hon. Members
rose——

§ Mr. Speaker
I will take a point of order from the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Mr. Wells) first.

§ Mr. Bowen Wells (Hertford and Stortford)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is with a sense of deep sadness and real concern that I bring this point of order to your attention. It has always been my intention to try to get the 1148 subject of abortion properly considered by the House, on the merits of the issues that have come before us as a result of medical advances, and to get it settled so that it is not constantly raised here.
Therefore, after the Committee stage of the Bill, I went to the Department of the Clerk of the House to inquire exactly how the amendments and the Bill would be handled on Report and Third Reading. I was given to understand that precedent would be followed exactly, and that, indeed, the way in which the amendments on the timing after which——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman may have received advice unofficially, but he must bear in mind that the Chair makes the selection of amendments. I hope that he is not querying that.

§ Mr. Wells
Of course I accept entirely the prerogative of the Chair. We put our trust in the Chair to make these very difficult decisions. I believe that you, Mr. Speaker, and the Clerk's Department have given every consideration to the difficult issues that you have had to consider during the past two weeks, and I am not bringing that into question. However, we have to consider this serious question as a whole in the House. If precedent is not followed by Mr. Speaker's Office and the Clerk's Department, we shall find ourselves in extremely deep water. I will tell you why, Mr. Speaker——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I gave most careful consideration to my selection of amendments. Precedent has been followed to the extent that the amendments will he voted on as they fall on the Amendment Paper, as would happen in the case of any other Bill before the House.

§ Ms. Clare Short (Birmingham, Ladywood)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I must say, with enormous regret, that I believe that the way in which you have selected the amendments is deeply biased, and does not allow——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I must stop the hon. Lady there. That was an unworthy comment for her to make. I think that the whole House will wish to get on with debating the Bill without raising points of order of that kind with me. May I tell the hon. Lady that the strongest representations were brought to me both by those in favour of the Bill and by those against it, urging me to select amendments which they judged would be in the interests of their respective points of view. I have had to make a very difficult decision about the fairest way of dealing with the matter. I have followed precedent to the extent that the votes will arise as the amendments come on the Amendment Paper. That would be the way in which any amendment would he debated and voted on in any other Bill.

§ Mr. Eric Forth (Mid-Worcestershire)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

§ Ms. Short
I have not finished my point of order, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Lady must wait.

§ Ms. Short
rose——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Lady must wait.

§ Mr. Forth
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I think that the House can well understand the difficult judgments 1149 that you have had to make in this matter. I think that you and the House are also aware that there are a number of different precedents that could have guided you.
The point on which I want your guidance, Mr. Speaker, perhaps as much for the future as for now, is this: is it the case that, on all occasions when a Bill is before the House and amendments are tabled, the precedents now being set—regardless of what may have been the case in the past—means that the order in which amendments are taken by the Chair will follow strictly and solely the order in which they are tabled? You will understand that the matter has important implications for the way in which the House conducts its business, and I ask you to give thought to it, Mr. Speaker.
If amendments will be considered only in the order in which they are accepted by the Table Office, hon. Members may be involved in undignified scrambles to get their amendments in first. I believe that you, the Table Office and the Clerks will have to give serious consideration to how you will handle the battle that may occur when hon. Members table their amendments in sequence, if that is to determine the way in which they are considered by the House. That is the important implication of what is happening today.
I hope that you, Mr. Speaker, will clarify for the House how the matter is to be handled and whether it is an immutable rule that will apply to all Bills in future.

§ Mr. Speaker
The same applies to all Bills. There are precedents for altering the order, but every Bill is considered on its merits.

§ Mr. David Steel (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask you a question about your selection of the first group of amendments? You have selected new clause 3 for debate with amendments Nos. 40, 41 and 42. They have different purposes. I am opposed to new clause 3, but I support amendment No. 41. Will there be a chance to divide on the amendments as well as on new clause 3?

§ Mr. Speaker
I shall certainly allow a Division on amendment No. 40 or on amendment No. 41.

§ Mr. Andrew MacKay (Berkshire, East)
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I seek your guidance and clarification on the point raised by the leader of the Liberal party. New clause 3 does not seem to relate to my amendments Nos. 40, 41 and 42, and I am somewhat surprised that they are being taken together.
New clause 3 appears towards the beginning of the Amendment Paper. Therefore, at the end of the first debate on the amendments that you have chosen to group together, we shall presumably be entitled to vote on new clause 3. My amendments, which I shall obviously press to a Division because I believe that they are important, will presumably be considered after the next debate, because they are in a later line of the Bill but are what I would call weak amendments. May I have confirmation of that?

§ Mr. Speaker
That is absolutely correct.

§ Mr. Dafydd Wigley (Caernarfon)
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker, and further to what you said a moment ago in response to the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Forth). With this Bill, as with 1150 other Bills, the amendments have been selected on their merits. As it appears that the overwhelming interest of the House is to vote on the amendment concerning the period of 24 weeks, how is it possible not to have that amendment at the head of the list of amendments.

§ Mr. Speaker
As I said earlier, if I had remarshalled the amendments—and it would have been a remarshalling—I could have been accused of favouring one group of hon. Members who favour one method of calling amendments as opposed to the other. I hope that the whole House will accept that the Speaker has a heavy responsibility in selecting amendments. In the circumstances, I have selected them in the same way as I would select amendments to any other Bill that comes before the House. I hope that the House will now get on with debating it and not challenge my selection of amendments. I have given enormous thought to the amendments that should be selected. I believe that I have been fair to all parties who are interested in the Bill, and I hope that we can now proceed to debate it.

§ Mr. Skinner
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I want to try to help you.

§ Mr. Speaker
I am deeply grateful, but I call Ms. Richardson first.

§ Mr. Wells
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
Absolutely not. I have called Ms. Richardson.

§ Ms. Jo Richardson (Barking)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My point of order is about your selection, but it relates to a different point. I am being absolutely serious; it is a matter of life and death.
Amendment No. 36, which is about emergency provisions for abortion, has not been selected. I am not disputing the deep thought that you have given to the amendments, Mr. Speaker, but it could well be that you perhaps did not entirely understand. I shall briefly explain. In the Abortion Act 1967, there is an emergency provision——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Lady may not do that. Again, I say to her and to the whole House that I have given the greatest and most careful consideration to the amendments over a long period—ever since they started to come in. I do not propose to change my selection of amendments. We should get on with debating the Bill.

§ Mrs. Maria Fyfe (Glasgow, Maryhill)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I notice that amendment No. 8, to delete Scotland from the provisions, has not been selected.

§ Mr. Speaker
I know. I have not selected it.

§ Mrs. Fyfe
rose——

§ Mr. Speaker
I am sorry. I have not selected it.

§ Mr. Brian Sedgemore (Hackney, South and Shoreditch)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether you can help me. This is a different and genuine point of order. I know that it is unusual to have a genuine point of order.

§ Mr. Skinner
Mine are genuine.

§ Mr. Sedgemore
I defer to my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner).
1151 Yesterday I went through what I thought was the correct procedure to present a petition to the House. I wonder whether you can tell me whether I did something wrong. I went upstairs to the Journal Office and got the petition signed by somebody with the initials DLR. I went to the Table Office and was told by the Clerks, who are always helpful on such occasions. that the petition was perfectly in order. You did not call it this morning. Therefore, I take it that the petition was not perfectly in order. I shall he grateful if you will tell me why it was not perfectly in order so that I may re-present it.

§ Mr. Speaker
I shall need to look into that matter.

Several Hon. Members
rose——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. There are many outside the House who are following our discussions this morning with a great deal of interest. I believe that they expect us to debate the Bill and to come to our decisions in a parliamentary way. To raise points of order with the Chair on matters relating to selection is not the correct parliamentary way of proceeding.

Several Hon. Members
rose——

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) promised to be helpful. I think we must then get on.

§ Mr. Skinner
The first thing that I have to say, which will undoubtedly be helpful, is that any serious miscalculation in respect of the petition of my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore) will be resolved. I am certain that you, Mr. Speaker, will ensure that adequate time will be provided later today for my hon. Friend to present his petition and for a report to be made on how the miscalculation occurred.
The other matter that caused a little furore earlier was your comment that, in accordance with precedent, you, Mr. Speaker, have selected the amendments in a certain manner. In answer to an intervention by the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Forth)—it was probably the only constructive thing that he has said in all the years that I have known him—you said that you were dealing with the matter on an ad hoc basis. As you must get these things right for future Bills, you need a form of words that will enable you to clarify the position in relation not only to this Bill but to others. Otherwise, you will be placed in a serious predicament, with people scrambling to table amendments and camping out upstairs to get them tabled in order.

§ Mr. Speaker
It is rare for the Chair to remarshal amendments. It does not normally happen, and it has not happened today.

§ Mrs. Teresa Gorman (Billericay)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I seek your guidance on the amendments relating to Northern Ireland. I raise this point, although I am not a Northern Ireland Member. However, it puzzles me that——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I give the same answer to the hon. Lady as I gave to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe). I have not selected any amendments concerning Northern Ireland.

§ Mr. John Gorst (Hendon, North)
Will you, Mr. Speaker, say whether the amount of time spent dealing with points of order will affect the precedents with regard to acceptance of a closure motion, if it is moved?

§ Mr. Speaker
The Chair would be bound to have to take into account points of order during the forthcoming debate, but I hope that they will be genuine points of order. I shall take one more point of order, but we must then proceed with the business. I wish to call the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore), whose petition was, by mistake, not listed.

§ Ms. Short
rose——

§ Mr. Speaker
Sit down please. I said I shall take one more point of order. I call Mr. Andrew Bennett.

§ Mr. Andrew F. Bennett
I tried to catch your eye earlier, Mr. Speaker, to support my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen), who raised the question of selection and his disappointment that his amendment had not been selected. On that occasion, You made it clear that it was not possible, as I fully accept, for hon. Members to question your selection of amendments, but you implied that that referred to the debate on this Bill.
As I understand it, your selection refers to today's business. If the business continues beyond today. would you be in a position—perhaps unfortunately for you—to make a new selection? You would then be able to take into account my hon. Friend's amendment and any other amendments that were tabled. It will be a considerable help to my hon. Friend to have an assurance that there would be a completely new selection procedure if we do not complete the business today.
You said, Mr. Speaker, that new clause 3 would be voted on and that amendments Nos. 40, 41 and 42 would be voted on at the appropriate point. Will you confirm that, if the closure is moved on new clause 3, voting on amendments Nos. 40, 41 and 42 will automatically be taken after 2.30 pm? Will the opportunity to vote on those amendments be lost, if it is not possible to vote on them before 2.30 pm, or is there a procedure by which we can return to those amendments on another occasion?

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Gentleman well knows that, if the Bill is not completed today—and I think that the House hopes that we shall make progress on it—I should have to reconsider my selection for any subsequent debate.
I reiterate what I have already said about new clause 3. I am prepared to allow the House a vote on either amendment No. 40 or amendment No. 41. They will fall for Division later at their proper place on the Amendment Paper. I now call the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch to present his petition.

§ Mr. Sedgemore
I am most grateful that, on this morning of passion and fury, you, Mr. Speaker, have put the procedure right and upheld the rights of my constituents to petition against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
The petition is signed by 340 persons living in Hackney, South and Shoreditch and one other person named Ann Clwyd whose address is 70, St. Michael's Road, Llandaff. My petitioners are concerned about the effects of the Bill on the health of women, on their right to choose whether 1153 they should have abortions and on the fact that they believe that, if the Bill is enacted, it will lead to further attacks on the 1967 Act.
The petition says: To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act. Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable. House do vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.