§ 3 p.m.
§ Lord DUNCAN-SANDYSMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will consider taking steps to prohibit the organisation of marches along the public highway.
§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Belstead)My Lords, the Government announced during the Statement on the disturbances at Southall made on 27th June that a review of the Public Order Act 1936 and related legislation was to be undertaken. The adequacy of the powers for the preservation of public order during processions is a matter to which the Government attach importance and it will certainly form part of that review.
§ Lord DUNCAN-SANDYSMy Lords, while thanking my noble friend for his reply and the implied assurance that this matter will receive serious consideration, may I ask him whether the Government will bear in mind that, while everyone recognises the democratic right of assembly—that is to say, the right to hold public meetings indoors and outdoors—there are very many people who do not accept that this necessarily includes the right to organise mass marches through our towns, the right to hold up all traffic, the right to prevent other citizens from going about their lawful business, and, perhaps most 883 serious of all, the right to divert large numbers of police from more important duties?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, those who would be prevented by a ban from marching would still be free, of course, to organise a meeting, and that, too, could give rise to severe disorder and inconvenience. While, therefore, I fully sympathise with my noble friend's desire to minimise disturbance to the general public, to ban all marches might not achieve that objective. My right honourable friend will certainly look at this issue very closely indeed in the review which he has instituted. May I just remind the House that he has also undertaken that on any matter touching the Representation of the People Act there will be consultations with the parties in the normal way.
§ Lord BLYTONMy Lords, is the Minister aware that he ought to be very careful in regard to this question? After all is said and done, trade unions have demonstrated and marched through the streets for years. The attitude of the questioner would require that the Durham Miners' Gala through the streets of Durham, which has gone on for a hundred years, in Northumberland, in Yorkshire, would be abolished.
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I do not think this is what my noble friend Lord Duncan-Sandys is getting at at all. The vast majority of processions—I entirely agree with the noble Lord, Lord Blyton—do not cause major inconvenience or disorder. I think the point which my noble friend was getting at is that there is a need to find a balance which, so far as is possible, reconciles the rights of those who wish to protest with the rights of ordinary people who want to go about their daily lives in peace.
§ Lord ELWYN-JONESMy Lords, should not a distinction be made between peaceful law-abiding marches, which have been a feature of our democratic practices through the ages, and marches like those of the National Front through immigrant areas, done in a threatening fashion accompanied by racialist abuse? Should not those marches now be subject to some control and indeed intervention? How soon are we likely to hear the outcome of 884 the review which I am sure the House is delighted to hear the Government are undertaking not only into the Public Order Act but, so far as election periods are concerned, into the Representation of the People Act?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, it is, if I may say so, because the noble and learned Lord has hit the nail on the head with regard to the difficulty of making distinctions in these matters, that my right honourable friend felt that the time had come for a review of the 1936 Act and related legislation. With regard to the second supplementary question, about the timing, which the noble and learned Lord put to me, your Lordships might wish to know that my right honourable friend's review initially will take place within his department. Naturally, it will take into account points of view put in both Houses of Parliament, not least the expressions of opinion put by your Lordships today, and then my right honourable friend will wish to consult organisations principally interested. After that, my right honourable friend will consider what further procedural steps will be necessary in the light of that initial work. I am sure the noble and learned Lord will acquit me of any discourtesy if I say that I cannot put a timescale on it.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, could the noble Lord tell us whether the Government have considered whether any amendment of the law is necessary? Is it not a fact that the public right to use the highway is one strictly limited to purposes of transit? Is there any absolute right to obstruct the highway by parading? Is not this something which in any event is only legal with special permission, and is any change of the law necessary? Is it not merely a change of administration?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, the noble Lord may be right, but it is because the answers to the questions which he puts are obscure that my right honourable friend has felt it necessary now to undertake a review.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for the reply which he gave to the Question, in view of the terrible situation being created by the National Front—the holding of 885 marches in order to incite racial misunderstandings, and going into districts where people are incited to attack them, and one can readily understand why—will the noble Lord please ask the Government to direct their attention to that particular form of demonstration, which is so damaging to everybody who has any civilised ideas in his mind at all?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I appreciate the concern which the noble Lord expresses, but it is part of our democratic tradition that people should be free to express their views, however unpalatable they may be to others, so long as they keep within the law. It is the review of the law which my right honourable friend has felt is necessary at the present time.
§ Lord DUNCAN-SANDYSMy Lords, while recognising the difficulties to which reference has been made, in particular the point raised by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Elwyn-Jones, and the obvious difficulty of discriminating between one type of march and another, can my noble friend assure us that the possibility—I am not asking more than that—of restricting marches of a political and demonstration nature will be seriously considered in the course of the Government's examination of the problems of law and order?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I gave an undertaking a few minutes ago that the subject matter of my noble friend's Question will certainly be taken seriously into account in the review that my right honourable friend is undertaking.