Standing Committee B
Tuesday 28 April 1998
[Mrs. Ray Michie in the Chair]
10.30 am
The Chairman: Good morning everyone. Welcome to the first sitting of consideration in Committee of the Crime and Disorder Bill. Before I call the Minister to move the sittings motion, I must announce that I have not selected the amendment tabled to it by the Opposition.
The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. Alun Michael): I beg to move,
That during the proceedings on the Crime and Disorder Bill [Lords], the Committee do meet on Tuesdays and Thursdays at half-past Ten o'clock and half-past Four o'clock.
I look forward to the pleasure of sitting under your chairmanship, Mrs. Michie. This is the first time that I have done so. I am sure that the Bill will stimulate a great deal of constructive debate.
I note, Mrs. Michie, that you have not selected the Opposition amendment to the sittings motion. The Committee will require flexibility. The duration of our sittings will depend on decisons that are made through the usual channels and on the extent to which hon. Members wish to debate the issues raised by the Bill. We are ready to discuss the Bill for extended periods if that is the wish of the Committee. The provisons of the Bill are worthy of support and we look forward to debates in Committee.
As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary implied during Second Reading, the Government aim to achieve Royal Assent before the summer. The public want to see progress in the fight against crime and disorder and will be unforgiving if there is needless delay. We must move quickly to ensure that the provisons of the Bill are enacted.
The Government want to bring a number of provisions into effect quickly and to pilot a number of youth justice provisions from the autumn. As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary said, we also want the youth justice board to be in place from October.
I should like to think that we can address the issues from a position of knowledge and understanding. That is why I have offered the hon. Members for Hertsmere (Mr. Clappison) and for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Allan) explanatory briefings with myself or my officials, and I gladly repeat my offer. I known from my experience in opposition that the meaning of legislation is not always clear when one comes to it fresh. I want the Committee to debate and argue about those matters on which we disagree, but not on matters which arise from a misunderstanding of the conents of the Bill.
I was grateful to the official Opposition for their support for the Bill during its unopposed Second Reading and for the constructive contributions made by Liberal Democrat Members.
Sir Robert Smith (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine): Will the Minister confirm that the Scottish Office will be involved in these informal briefings, to ensure that the Scottish aspects of the Bill will also be explained?
Mr. Michael: Yes, that is certainly the case. The order of consideration groups together the clauses relating to Scotland. That will enable Scottish Members, and the Minister, to take part coherently in the debates, with the best level of information that we are able to provide.
The Bill will make a real difference to the lives of many of our constitutents, who are plagued by the evils of crime. I hope that we can co-operate constructively to ensure that the Bill reaches the statute book as quckly as possible.
Mr. James Clappison (Hertsmere): I join the Minister in saying what a great pleasure it is to see you in the Chair, Mrs. Michie. The Opposition look forward to serving in this Committee under your chairmanship and that of Mr. O'Hara. We are grateful to the Government for their offer of assistance by way of briefing on some of the technical matters in the Bill. We realise that it is best to debate such technical and detailed matters from a basis of common understanding, so that it will be clear where real, substantive disagreements exist. Technical and detailed matters can give rise to important questions, so such an approach is necessary.
The Committee will be pleased to know that I intend to speak only briefly on the sittings motion. I should mention--in a gentle and friendly way--that I was somewhat surprised at the motion, in view of the Minister's philosophy on sittings, as I remember it. He argued strongly, in the Committee that considered the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, in favour of sitting in the mornings only. The Minister--in his then capacity as Opposition spokesman--said:
``I have various points to make to persuade the Committee and, I hope, the Minister--I always live in hope--that the right way of dealing with the matter would be to meet in the mornings only for a period.''--[Official Report, Standing Committe B, 18 January 1994; c. 5.]
He has had a change of heart about that, apparently, and I do not want to go into how that came about.
Our purpose in tabling an amendment, which has not been selected, was to urge the Minister not to go from one extreme to another in his attitude to sittings. Our only aim in Committee will be to give the Bill proper consideration, and we want its sittings to be structured to allow that. We want to deal properly with the wide range of important subjects covered by the Bill, such as the fight against drugs and dealing with sex offenders and youth crime, to maximise the help that we give to people who work in the relevant parts of the justice system.
Mr. Andrew Dismore (Hendon): In view of the hon. Gentleman's remarks, perhaps he will confirm that he intends to help the Government to pass the Bill as quickly as possible.
Mr. Clappison: I do not know how many Standing Committees the hon. Gentleman has served on, or whether he considered previous criminal justice Bills in Committee, but he will know that many matters need to be examined in such proceedings. I was about to finish my remarks by emphasising that Conservative Members' aim--and our proper duty as an Opposition--is to give the Bill full consideration. We shall do that to the best of our ability.
Mr. Richard Allan (Sheffield, Hallam): It falls to the Liberal Democrat Members in Committee to be third in declaring our pleasure at your presence in the Chair today, Mrs. Michie. However, that pleasure is not diminished.
We generally support the Bill whose timetable we are now considering. It will be interesting to observe the official Opposition and the Government getting used to their new roles during debates on the Bill. I understand that previous criminal justice Bills, of which I have no experience, took up considerable time. Liberal Democrat Members intend to table amendments only on issues about which we want serious debate. We shall take advantage of the opportunity for further briefing on matters that we suspect need only technical clarification. The Committee should maximise the time it spends considering serious issues of fundamental importance, and spend as little as possible on arcane debates that are not relevant to the passage of the Bill. We hope that the Bill will reach the statute book, for the benefit of the constituents of all hon. Members.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That during the proceedings on the Crime and Disorder Bill [Lords] the Committee do meet on Tuesdays and Thursdays at half-past Ten o'clock and half-past Four o'clock.
The Chairman: I remind the Committee that there is a financial resolution connected to the Bill. Copies are available in the Room. I also remind the Committee that adequate notice of amendments should be given. As a general rule, my co-Chairman and I do not intend to call starred amendments, including those that may be reached during an afternoon sitting.
Amendments may not be tabled this Friday, which is a non-sitting day. In order for amendments to be unstarred, and, therefore, able to be selected for next Tuesday, they should be tabled no later than the rise of the House on Thursday 30 April. The House is expected to rise at 7.30 pm on that day.
Mr. Michael: I am sure that the news that you have imparted, Mrs. Michie, will be music to the ears of some of my colleagues. It is good to know that we have an optimist in the Chair.
I beg to move,
That the Bill be considered in the following order, namely, Clauses 1 to 18; Clauses 25 to 29; Clause 77; Clauses 31 to 38; Schedule 2; Clauses 39 to 48; Schedule 3; Clauses 49 to 60; Schedule 4; Clauses 61 to 64; Schedule 5; Clauses 65 to 76; Clause 78; Clauses 89 to 97; Clauses 100 to 108; Clauses 19 to 24; Schedule 1; Clause 30; Clause 88; Clauses 79 to 86; Schedule 6; Clause 87; Clauses 98 and 99; new Clauses; Schedules 7 to 10; new Schedules.
To reply to the hon. Member for Hertsmere, of course we sometimes suggested when we were in Opposition that muddled and confused legislation should be tackled only in the mornings, but we have presented a precise, coherent measure, which will allow the Committee to deal with the necessary business more quickly. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will recall the constructive and helpful way in which we tackled the previous Government's legislation on law and order. We suggested improvements, which were not always accepted, but we also supported provisions that would benefit the public.
Despite the Bill's coherence, any measure has to be drafted in a way that makes sense to lawyers. Therefore, there are technical considerations in the construction of a measure. The order of consideration groups related items together for the Committee's benefit.
In essence, we are proposing that all the Scottish provisions should be considered together after we have discussed the provisions for England and Wales. That will allow the Committee to focus on the important provisions for Scotland. My hon. Friend the Minister for Home Affairs and Devolution, Scottish Office, the Member for Fife, Central (Mr. McLeish), will lead on those clauses. I am wise enough to know that a Welshman should think long and hard before trespassing into the territory of Scottish law, although that is probably marginally--I stress marginally--more acceptable than the same trespass by an English Member of Parliament.
The order of consideration provides for the main schedules to be considered immediately after the relevant clauses, thus enabling us to deal with a topic coherently.
We propose that clause 77 should be grouped with earlier clauses on the new racially aggravated offences, and that clauses 30 and 88, which deal with racially aggravated offences in Scotland, could usefully be considered sequentially. I commend the order of consideration to the Committee, and hope that it will provide a sensible structure for our deliberations on the Bill.
| 
