Private Security Industry Bill [Lords]
9:55 am
Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)
I welcome you to the Chair, Mr. Winterton. Unlike the Minister, I have previously served under your chairmanship on Bill and statutory instrument Committees, and I know that you will attend to your duties with your customary forthright independence.
I agree with the Minister that the Bill should proceed smoothly. The Government and the official Opposition do not have any disagreements concerning the Programming Sub-Committee's resolution. We have agreed to the programme motion and to the fact that one of the sitting times may have to be extended, if the need arises, to provide for eight sittings. There is no difference between the Government and the official Opposition about that.
I shall repeat a point that I raised during the proceedings of the Programming Sub-Committee. The official Opposition's strong and consistent view is that all proceedings of such Committees should be minuted and form part of the Official Report.
As this Committee's deliberations appear in Hansard, it is important to place it on record that my hon. Friend the Member for North Thanet (Mr. Gale)—who chaired the Committee considering the Criminal Justice and Police Bill on which the Minister and I served—has indicated that he believes, as do we, that it would be helpful for the Liaison Committee, the Chairmen's Panel and the Modernisation Committee to consider minuting all future Programming Sub-Committees. His opinion arises because of disputes that occurred in the Criminal Justice and Police Bill. The matter would be a decision for the House when the Chairmen's Panel and the Committees have considered it.
We believe that the matter is important because an official record would mean that there could be no dispute about what was said, and not said, in the Sub-Committee. There will be no dispute about what was said in this Bill's Programming Sub-Committee, but there has been in other Bills. There were good reasons for the creation of Hansard in the 19th century, which were to ensure that there was no misunderstanding of proceedings, and a clear record. That must apply equally to Programming Sub-Committees.
It would also be useful for the Modernisation of the House of Commons Committee, the Liaison Committee and the Chairmen's Panel to consider whether it would be appropriate for all members of the Standing Committee to be allowed to attend and speak in the Programming Sub-Committee, even if they were not allowed to vote. Presently, there is the ridiculous position that even Front-Bench Members are not officially members of the Programming Sub-Committee. The situation may arise, as it did in the Criminal Justice and Police Bill, when Front-Bench Members could attend the Programming Sub-Committee, but could neither speak nor vote. I place on record the official Opposition's view that that must be reconsidered, and we will continue to raise the matter until it is resolved.
We appreciate the Government's assistance in indicating that they are prepared to contemplate a proposal from the official Opposition to consider matters in a different order, if the need arises as proceedings continue. We may take the Government up on that, although it is difficult to predict how matters will progress. Presently, we do not have such a proposal, as we have no difficulties with the programming motion, and we hope that seven or eight sittings will be sufficient.