| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Hunt of Wirral: My Lords, the debates on this Bill have been marked by consensus and common sense and by the positive, constructive and patient approach of the Minister and her team. I am also grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, for his very positive approach.
The Bill leaves this House looking outwardly much as it did at the outset, but some important changes have been made. As the Minister knows, although we have broadly supported the retention of Clause 1, we do have certain doubts.
The courts will have to build up case law relating to this new concept of "desirable activity" and we cannot be sure precisely where that will lead. There is also a danger that it may be applied unevenly.
However, a half-full cup seems preferable to an empty one, and I am very grateful to the Minister for amending Clause 1 by explicitly extending its terms to include breaches of statutory duty. I am particularly grateful for her comments on the new Clause 2. It was designed to clarify the law, not to change it. The intention, which I share with the Minister, is to change perceptions, behaviours and outcomes. In the new Clause 2 we are reasserting in statute that to apologise, to say sorry, is something separate and wholly different—legally as well as socially—from an admission of liability. I am particularly pleased that the Minister conceded that point.
There are three distinct provisions: an apology shall not of itself amount to an admission of negligence or breach of statutory duty; an offer of treatment shall not of itself amount to such an admission; and an offer of other redress shall not of itself amount to such an admission. If this clause is accepted in another place, as I hope it will be, the effect on people's behaviour could be dramatic. So we have done our bit to restore some civility to society. I sincerely hope that the new Clause 2 will give a great boost to rehabilitation. I know that the Minister shares that view.
The principle of mending the person must lie right at the heart of the civil justice system. I look forward to hearing from the ministerial working group, which the Minister chairs, on a whole range of measures on rehabilitation to put it at the forefront of government policy. We must stop it being a Cinderella service and we must ensure that it is joined up. There is often a postcode lottery, and rehabilitation gets caught up in the crossfire between opposing lawyers. Over 80 per cent of injuries suffered in road traffic accidents are soft tissue injuries that would benefit from immediate, swift and targeted treatment. Sadly, there is all too infrequently the opportunity of delivering that
27 Mar 2006 : Column 577
treatment to victims. I hope now, with the Government's announcement today, that a clear signal is sent to everyone that rehabilitation is a good thing, no "ifs" and no "buts".
I make no further comment about Part 2 except that I hope that the Government's wish to see regulation in place by October will be fulfilled. We need a system of effective regulation and a regulator that possesses impartiality, independence and integrity. I know that the Minister shares that view. She is aware of my enthusiasm for the FSA model of regulation, and I know that she is still considering that aspect. In closing, I re-emphasise my hope—not just my hope—that this Bill is just part of a great interlocking jigsaw of measures that will kick the so-called compensation culture into touch for good. What an achievement that would be.
Lord Goodhart: My Lords, I add my thanks to those of the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Wirral. When this Bill came to your Lordships' House, it certainly appeared to me and, I believe, to the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, that Part 2 contained a number of fairly serious defects. They were not defects of principle—we have always supported the principle that claims management firms should be brought under regulation—but defects of detail. That being so, the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, and I put forward a number of what I believe were constructive amendments and we are both—I am speaking for myself in saying that I am—extremely grateful to the noble Baroness for having listened and for having brought about changes in the Bill. Part 2 has now been both changed and improved to an unusual degree, and it is now a very much better Bill than it was when it was brought forward. The objections raised by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee have also been met to a large extent.
As for Part 1, I remain dubious as to whether Clause 1 will do more good than harm. It presents a real risk of causing serious problems. However, I am pleased that the Government have accepted Clause 2, and I hope that one consequence will be that insurance companies will drop their current practice of insisting that, in the case of road accidents, people who they insure should never apologise.
Overall, I welcome the fact that this Bill will now go on to the other place. We do not expect to see it back again unless the Government come up, during the course of its proceedings elsewhere, with amendments that they feel it is necessary to include. That is unlikely; so we wish the Bill bon voyage.
On Question, Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.
European Council: 23-24 March 2006
5.14 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman):
My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now
27 Mar 2006 : Column 578
repeat a Statement made in another place by the Foreign Secretary, the right honourable Jack Straw. The Statement is as follows:
"With permission, Mr Speaker, I should like to make a Statement about the European Council which took place in Brussels last Thursday and Friday. As the House is aware, my right honourable friend the Prime Minister normally makes the post-Council Statement to the House. I have been asked to convey his apologies. He is on an official visit to Australia and New Zealand.
"The Hampton Court informal summit in October, during our presidency, set the framework for this spring Council in Brussels. The economic challenges for many, though not all, member states of the Union are severe. Despite significant progress since the Lisbon Agenda was launched, there are still around 20 million out of work. In some states, in contrast to the United Kingdom, unemployment is around 10 per cent, and almost one in five young people is without a job.
"The British Government know that there is only one way to get Europe back to work and to deliver social justice in a global economy. We base this not on theory, but on solid evidence. As my right honourable friend the Chancellor pointed out in his Budget speech, in 1996 we had the lowest income per head of all G7 countries. Today, we are second only to the United States. We have grown more quickly, created more jobs and provided more social benefits than most other member states. We have done so by liberalising markets, by increasing our competitiveness and by investing in the future, including in our public services. The European response to globalisation must emphatically not be a return to old-fashioned protectionism by another name.
"Specific elements of the Hampton Court agenda were energy, research and development, and universities. First, energy: the case for a more liberal energy market is overwhelming. Gas and electricity prices in the period 1996 to 2004 here in the United Kingdom fell much faster than they had done in EU states which have kept their energy markets closed. So consumers in those countries will gain from a functioning internal market, and so will consumers in this country. We currently do not have access to the gas we would have in a more sensitised market. So one of the first achievements of the Lisbon Agenda back in 2003 was the decision to liberalise energy markets by 2007. Last week, the European Council reaffirmed that timetable.
"Completion of the internal market is one of four elements in a new approach to European energy policy. At the summit we agreed the programme relating to the other three areas, too: to intensify diversification of supply; to promote environmental sustainability; and, by the next European Council, to develop a strategy for dealing with countries outside the EU. The Council asked the Commission to present a strategic energy review on a regular basis, starting in 2007.
27 Mar 2006 : Column 579
"Next, research and development: rising economies, such as China and India, are investing heavily in science and technology. The way for Europe to compete is to be ahead of them, and to lead the knowledge economy rather than protecting old and uncompetitive industries. So the summit agreed the establishment of a European research council. This body will be run by scientists and its purpose will be to promote excellence in European research. We would expect universities and research communities in Britain to benefit.
"And linked to that is the third area: increased investment in universities, where currently only two of the top 20 universities in the world are European—both, I should say, in the United Kingdom. The European Union has to produce enough graduates of the right calibre, and to improve links between business and universities, if we are going to open up and prosper in new global markets.
"In addition to the Hampton Court agenda, the British presidency had taken forward valuable work on better regulation and on the services directive. There was further progress on both these areas at the Council.
"The summit tasked the Commission to report by the end of 2006 on measurable EU targets for removing administrative burdens on business, and particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, as well as to press ahead with the reforms undertaken during our presidency: more simplification of existing EU legislation, further withdrawal of unnecessary or outdated legislation, and more effective use of impact assessments.
"The summit also agreed a way forward on the services directive. This directive will be of great assistance to British service companies and to opening up Europe properly to a single market in services. Let me be plain. It is not everything we wanted, but a year ago some European leaders were declaring the directive dead and buried. It is not. It will represent a significant advance in the process of making Europe globally competitive.
"It is customary that the spring European Council concentrates largely on the economic agenda of the European Union. However, all member states shared a deep concern about the recent elections in Belarus. We agreed a statement which condemned the actions of the Belarus authorities in arresting peaceful demonstrators early on the morning of Friday 24 March. We also restated our view, based on the assessment by the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, that the elections were fundamentally flawed.
"The European Union is now deciding on restrictive measures that it will take with respect to the Belarus authorities. President Lukashenko did not escape responsibility. The European Union applauds those who stood up for democracy against the odds and is determined to support civil society and the Belarussian people.
27 Mar 2006 : Column 580
"The situation in Belarus stands in stark contrast to the situation in neighbouring Ukraine. The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe said that yesterday's elections there,
'enabled voters to make informed choices between distinct alternatives and to freely and fairly express their will',
This is a testament to the remarkable progress made in Ukraine since the orange revolution of 2004.
"Finally, as I am on my feet on European Business, the House will wish to be aware that earlier today I issued a Written Ministerial Statement in respect of the successful conclusion of the Gibraltar constitutional reform negotiations on 17 March. The new constitution, which will be put before the people of Gibraltar in a referendum, strengthens the links between Gibraltar and the United Kingdom, and thoroughly modernises the relationship between us, which I hope will be as welcome to the people of Gibraltar as it will to the United Kingdom.
"Last week's summit was a further step towards a more outward-looking European Union that delivers concrete benefits to its citizens. There is still a long way to go. The Government are in no doubt that Britain's best interests lie in a European Union that is open to the world, competitive and confident. We will continue to pursue that agenda vigorously. I commend this Statement to the House".
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
5.23 pm
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |