Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Bill (Hansard, 13 May 1987)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Northern Ireland Office (Lord Lyell)
My Lords, I understand that no amendments have been set down to this Bill and that no noble Lord has indicated a wish to move a manuscript amendment or to speak in Committee. Therefore, unless any noble Lord objects, I beg to move that the order of commitment be discharged.

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a third time.
I should like to refer briefly to four matters which were raised by noble Lords in our debate last week. The first of these issues is the question of the composition of the Crown Court for the trial of scheduled offences. The noble Lords, Lord Hampton, Lord Donaldson and Lord Hylton, expressed support for the idea that the court should consist of three judges. The case for such a change rests on two assumptions: first, that a three-judge court would result in an objectively better system of justice; and, 635 secondly, that a three-judge court would inspire greater public confidence in the administration of justice. The Government are not at present persuaded that either of these assumptions is justified.
I should like to say a few more words about the question of a code of practice for the exercise of emergency powers, which was mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Hylton. Legislation for Northern Ireland is being prepared which will be equivalent to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, including provisions requiring the introduction of codes of practice for the exercise of police powers. The Government recognise the desirability of providing a clear statement of the powers available to the security forces and indicating clearly the ways in which those powers should be exercised, but codes directly equivalent to those issued under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act would not bite on the exercise of powers under the emergency legislation. My honourable friend the Minister of State in another place accordingly announced on 8th April the Government's intention of publishing and bringing into force a non-statutory code of practice for the exercise of emergency powers by the RUC and the armed forces.
Thirdly, I mentioned last week that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State was considering the appointment of an independent person of standing to review the operation of the emergency provisions legislation each year. I am glad to be able to tell the House that my right honourable friend has decided that such a review should be carried out and that the Government have asked my noble friend Lord Colville of Culross to undertake this task. My noble friend produced a thorough and helpful review of the operation of the Prevention of Terrorism Act throughout the United Kingdom earlier this year and has just undertaken to carry out a rather more substantial review of that Act. All that will put my noble friend in a strong position when separately reviewing the operation of the emergency provisions legislation to assess the whole package of emergency powers that applies in Northern Ireland.
Finally, I should like to cover the point raised by several noble Lords about the availability of remission to convicted prisoners in Northern Ireland. In most cases it is 50 per cent. remission of the original sentence. I stresss that the remission applies only to what we call determinate sentences; that is sentences that are not life sentences. Remission can be lost if the prisoner commits disciplinary offences and unlike what happens in England and Wales remission is conditional. The balance of the sentence may be reimposed by the courts if the person concerned is reconvicted. The 50 per cent. remission arrangements reflect the difficulty of establishing a parole system in Northern Ireland but I can assure noble Lords that the whole system is kept under review.
I and the Government were delighted with the welcome given to the Bill last week when we discussed it on Second Reading. I acknowledge that many noble Lords may be disappointed that we have not been able to have a fuller discussion of that particular legislation because, certainly, it is sensitive. We believe that further discussion would have merits but we are very encouraged by the support of this Chamber for the 636 Bill. We hope that its provisions will find their way onto the statute book at the earliest opportunity. I beg to move.

§ Lord Prys-Davies
My Lords, we are grateful to the Minister, the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, for the assurances that he has brought to the House this afternoon. Of course we are saddened that it is still necessary to have emergency provisions legislation in Northern Ireland. But the Bill, which amends the current legislation in a number of respects, will be an improvement on that legislation. It gives greater protection to the individual citizen without causing damage to the requirements of security.
In the Second Reading debate last Friday, the Bill was welcomed generally by the House. From these Benches we indicated about half a dozen areas that we should have wished to explore in Committee, believing that the Bill would have benefited from such discussion. However, we have been overtaken by events, as we had anticipated. We are pleased to support the Bill and to facilitate its passage before the dissolution of Parliament.

§ Lord Hampton
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his comments on some points that I raised at Second Reading and welcome the review planned by the noble Viscount, Lord Colville. In the Official Report I was quoted as saying that we should be happy if the emergency provisions were in future removed annually. The passage should of course have read, "renewed annually". Quite a lot of hard work went into this Bill in the other place and we are grateful that it is in pretty good shape. I do not think that I can with advantage add further to the debate. We support the Third Reading but with some regret that more time has not been available to scrutinise such important legislation.

§ Lord Lyell
My Lords, perhaps I may utter a few words of deep gratitude to the two noble Lords who have spoken for all the work that has been done on the Bill in this Chamber as well as that done by colleagues in another place. I am sure that all that has been said this afternoon and during our discussions at an earlier stage will be read with encouragement by my colleagues in another place. I beg to move.
On Question, Bill read a third time, and passed.