Mr William Cash (Stone, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 46, in

clause 10, page 5, line 24, at end insert

'the name of which shall include the words ''and Gibraltar''.'.

In certain respects, the amendment is important, but it is also interesting. I hope that Committee members at one point or another, through sheer willpower, will bring themselves to say something about at least one provision. However, I see from the fact that the Whip is shaking his head that they have not the slightest intention of doing so. We are keeping well to the programme resolution, and if I restricted my remarks, we would finish in about an hour and a half. However, I am certain that if we were to do that, as the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome would agree, we would not have properly considered the Bill.

The amendment is important for many reasons. Let us imagine that we have a combined region that is called, for the sake of argument, the south-west. As the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome noted, that is the likely suggestion. We do not know for sure, and extensive discussions are needed with the Electoral Commission before we find out. I do not think that a huge battle is going on in the United Kingdom about the issue. There are preferences—both the west midlands and Northern Ireland have made suggestions—but those are matters that we are happy to leave to subsequent discussions and the consultation process. However, I most emphatically would not be happy, for reasons to which I have already referred, if the name of that region, as provided for in the Bill—I think that section 1 of the European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002 specifies the names of the electoral regions—did not have the words ''and Gibraltar'' with the name of whichever region is to be conjoined with Gibraltar.

I shall put my point in temperate language, because the last thing that I want to do on a matter of such importance is to antagonise the Minister or make it personal. That is far from my thoughts and intentions, so I shall explain my point gently. The people of Gibraltar have been given an opportunity through the Denise Matthews case. They are good honest citizens who now have a chance to take part in elections in a given area. We do not have the faintest idea—or at least, I do not—for whom they will all eventually vote. There will be a candidate, but I do not know whether there will be a Gibraltarian candidate—I should think that that is unlikely. However, within the framework of the electoral system, when the election happens they will have absolutely as much right as you or I over what goes on in their constituencies. They will be citizens like we are, exercising that right.

Gibraltar is being added into the process in special circumstances, with many constitutional and practical implications. I shall emphasise the practical because constitutional matters, important though they can be in defining parameters, make no sense at all if they are not related to practicalities. I am not interested in constitutional theology, but in a proper, fair and balanced conclusion arising from discussions. That is what constitutional matters should be about, and in that sense this is essentially a constitutional issue, because the people of Gibraltar are real people who ought to be recognised.

To add the words ''and Gibraltar'' to the name will give an opportunity for those people's concerns and the matters relative to their daily lives to be reflected in the elections. Simply to throw them into the pot and then say, ''Right, you're now part of the south-west region'' would be geographical nonsense and rather extraordinary, although I concede that the situation is unusual.

Mr Mark Hendrick (Preston, Labour/Co-operative)

As this is such an important constitutional issue, would the hon. Gentleman want to call for a referendum across the whole United Kingdom on it?

Mr William Cash (Stone, Conservative)

I am not going to bother to answer that. The important question is whether the Bill gives the people of Gibraltar a reasonable opportunity to have their daily practical lives and interactions reflected when the elections take place. I do not think that anyone with the slightest understanding of the situation could fail to appreciate that point. It is very simple, and concerns the day-to-day lives of those people.

The measure is an important step for those people. Simply to be rolled into a region called the south-west, the west midlands or whatever it might be would make them appear completely unrecognised—I do not like to use the word insulting—and would emphasise my point about what the Government have done. I simply do not agree with their reasons, although I suspect that I know who was behind what they did, which might have had a rather Hispanic connection. We shall see in due course. I may be entirely wrong, but if that were the case, I certainly would not agree with what was done on that and many other related issues.

My point is important. I shall be interested to see how the Minister reacts to it. I do not think that adding ''and Gibraltar'' would be difficult, and it would not only give enormous satisfaction to the people of Gibraltar but would recognise the territoriality of the issue and at the same give an enormous amount of pleasure and satisfaction to people in this country who feel strongly that Gibraltar should be supported.

Mr David Heath (Somerton & Frome, Liberal Democrat)

I do not believe that any long, complicated arguments need to be made in support of the amendment. It reflects amendments that I attempted to make to part 1 of the Bill, which the Minister said were premature at that point. I understand her saying that at the time, but such amendments cannot be premature now.

Recognising the existence of Gibraltar in the context of a combined region will be a beneficial

move. The hon. Member for Stone said that there was not overwhelming competition between the electoral regions to determine which should be chosen for the purpose by the Electoral Commission and recommended to the House, but on Second Reading there appeared to be a spirited application on behalf of Northern Ireland, which is the one area that is excluded by the Bill, and I believe that there were comments from a sedentary position about Scotland as well.

It might be helpful if the Minister would give the reasons for the Government's conclusion that neither Scotland nor Northern Ireland would be appropriate regions for the incorporation of Gibraltar. I can readily see why in the case of Northern Ireland, but I find it slightly more difficult to understand why Scotland could not be considered. Perhaps she would be kind enough to put on the record the Government's reasoning in this instance.

Mr Andrew Rosindell (Romford, Conservative)

You will know of my interest in the subject of Gibraltar, Mr. Cook—indeed, it was only a year ago that you and I were there—and you will know the strength of feeling among the British people on the Rock. I hope that hon. Members will try to understand why the people of Gibraltar are so passionate about the Bill.

They are British as we are British. They feel pride in their heritage, history and culture, as our constituents and we do. Yet despite joining the European Union—the European Economic Community, as it was in the early 1970s—at the same time and under the same accession treaty as the United Kingdom, they have been denied the right to speak on issues that affect them. I ask all Members to consider whether they would tolerate their constituents' being denied the democratic right to vote and speak on issues that affect them in the European Parliament or in this place.

I hope that there will be a greater understanding of the passion that is felt among Gibraltarians. My hon. Friend the Member for Stone referred to the recent referendum in Gibraltar. I was there at the time. For the record, I wish to declare an interest, having visited Gibraltar on several occasions as a guest of the Government of Gibraltar.

You will know, Mr. Cook, how determined the people of Gibraltar are to retain their Britishness and their sense of belonging to the United Kingdom. It is good news that at long last the Bill has come before Parliament. Very shortly, the people of Gibraltar will have a vote in European Parliament elections, at least. However, the Minister will acknowledge that the Government have not sought to allow that. It has been forced upon the Government. I do not believe for one moment that the Government would be introducing the Bill had the matter not been resolved by law.

Shamefully, Labour and Conservative Governments have ignored the people of Gibraltar for all this time. It is good news that the Bill is before the House, and the people of Gibraltar will get a vote in European elections. It would add insult to injury if the name of Gibraltar were excluded from the name of the region in which the Rock is to be included. I hope

that the Minister will consider that vital point of my hon. Friend the Member for Stone. It is very insulting to Gibraltarians that they are being given the vote reluctantly and the name of Gibraltar is not acknowledged in the name of the region.

Of course, Gibraltar is not geographically part of any region in the UK. It is not part of the south-west, London, or Northern Ireland. It is a peninsula attached to Spain. However, it is British, and will be included in European elections in the UK. How can it not be recognised in the name of whichever constituency it may be a part? The name must surely be given prominence and recognition in the Bill. If it is not, the people of Gibraltar will rightly feel hurt. I hope that the Minister will seriously consider the matter.

I know that the Government are reluctant about the Bill, but if they are going to give the people of Gibraltar the right to vote in the elections, let them do that with a good heart. I ask the Government to do it as if they really want to, even though deep down they perhaps did not want to do it in the first place. They should give Gibraltar the recognition the people of the Rock deserve by including the name of Gibraltar in the name of the region that it is included within.

Ms Yvette Cooper (Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department; Pontefract & Castleford, Labour)

I understand that there is strong feeling among some that the amendment should be passed. However, I ask that it should be resisted. The clause enables the Lord Chancellor to make an order to create the region following a recommendation from the Electoral Commission. The amendment would provide that the name of the combined region should include Gibraltar. I know that some hon. Members feel strongly that that should be the case, but we believe that the amendment is unnecessary and disproportionate to the achievement of the aims of the Bill.

The creation of the combined region and the requirement under clause 13 for there to be a register in the Gibraltar area for those eligible to vote in the European Parliament elections will ensure that the people of Gibraltar are enfranchised. Eligibility will be defined as it is in the United Kingdom. Clause 15(1) states clearly that a person is entitled to be registered in the Gibraltar register if on the relevant day he is resident in Gibraltar.

Adding Gibraltar to the title of the region will serve no further purpose as far as the franchise is concerned. It would not change the reality. In addition, schedule 1 of the European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002 lists the electoral regions of England and the areas that comprise those regions. They are defined geographically and if Gibraltar is to be combined with an English region for the purposes of the franchise, it will be added to the list of areas once the decision has been reached as to which region it should be combined with. If it is to be combined with Wales, there will need to be a provision that will include Gibraltar within the area of that region. That and the provisions for the franchise that I have already mentioned will make it clear that those who are eligible to vote and resident in Gibraltar will be enfranchised to vote in the elections. Gibraltar will be designated geographically as an area forming part of the chosen

region. Adding Gibraltar to the title will therefore add nothing to the reality of the franchise.

I understand that it seems preferable to Gibraltar to have its name in the title of the electoral region and I understand why some people feel strongly about that. We have to recognise that those in other parts of the region involved could see including Gibraltar in the title as disproportionate, given the size of the electorate in Gibraltar relative to the size of the electorate in some of the other geographical areas that may be included in the combined region. For example, the Isle of Wight has an electorate of 104,000 people, whereas Gibraltar has in the region of 20,000 voters.

Mr Andrew Rosindell (Romford, Conservative)

I understand the Minister's point, but surely she would accept that the Isle of Wight is very clearly part of the UK, whereas Gibraltar is not, although it would like to be. There is a clear difference between talking about an island off the shores of the UK, which is part of the UK and therefore already part of a recognised region, and Gibraltar, which is not geographically or politically part of any recognised region. Gibraltar is an overseas territory in its own right and a member of the European Union in its own right, via the accession treaty of the UK. If we give the people of Gibraltar the right to vote and include them as part of an electoral region, there can be no question but that the name of that electoral region should reflect the fact that Gibraltar is included in it.

Ms Yvette Cooper (Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department; Pontefract & Castleford, Labour)

Of course, Gibraltar is in a very different situation from the Isle of Wight. Nevertheless it is right to consider the size of the electorate. As I said, Gibraltar has in the region of 20,000 voters. Although electors in the combined region will recognise that it is right that Gibraltar's interests and concerns be taken into account, it is important to understand that they will be concerned if candidates or the media pay a disproportionate amount of attention to those interests. Gibraltar will be one part of the region and we must consider its size relative to the size of the region: it has 20,000 voters, whereas an average region has 3.7 million voters. Of course, it is right that people should be aware that Gibraltar is part of their region and that can be addressed through normal publicity and documentation in an election campaign, without any risk of skewing the political debate and focusing on one part of the region, rather than addressing all of the region.

The Bill makes it clear that Gibraltar will become part of a combined region and that people in Gibraltar should be able to vote in the European Parliament elections; we simply have to ensure that there are free and fair elections on the same basis for all voters covered as part of the system. The Bill does ensure that, although I understand that some people will take a different view. Those are the reasons why we have come to our decision on the name of the region.

Mr Andrew Rosindell (Romford, Conservative)

If the Minister refuses to include Gibraltar in the name of the region overall, will she consider including Gibraltar within Gibraltar? That would mean that election publicity in Gibraltar made

it clear that it was, say, ''London and Gibraltar''. That name would be used only on the Rock, for those purposes, and not in the rest of the region.

Ms Yvette Cooper (Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department; Pontefract & Castleford, Labour)

Certainly literature distributed in Gibraltar would make it clear that Gibraltar was part of the region. As I have said, it is possible to ensure that publicity and documentation provided during an election campaign make clear the different component parts of the region. Therefore, I shall look further at the hon. Gentleman's points, while maintaining that the overall title of the region must remain as in the Bill.

Mr David Heath (Somerton & Frome, Liberal Democrat)

I just want to jog the Minister's memory. I wondered whether she would have an opportunity to say why not Northern Ireland or Scotland.

Ms Yvette Cooper (Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department; Pontefract & Castleford, Labour)

I forgot that the hon. Gentleman had raised that point. We discussed this matter on Second Reading. The reason is primarily one of logistics—getting all the secondary legislation in place in time for the 2004 elections. Different kinds of secondary legislation will have to be drawn up if Scotland or Northern Ireland is involved, because of the different ways in which some of the details of electoral law apply in those two regions. Therefore, it would not be possible to start drawing up the programme of secondary legislation until the Electoral Commission had decided which region Gibraltar was to go into. If we confine the regions available to the Electoral Commission to choose from to England and Wales, the process of drafting the secondary legislation required can begin in advance of it taking that final decision, because, no matter which region we are talking about, the provisions are likely to be broadly the same. Therefore, it is a practical consideration, which is determined simply by the need to put secondary legislation in place in time for the 2004 elections.

Mr William Cash (Stone, Conservative)

I have not heard such a poor defence of an argument for a long time. It was driven by bureaucratic claptrap relating to names, sizes and proportionality, combined with a concern that, by including the words ''and Gibraltar'', we would perhaps offend Spain's sensitivities. I suspect that that has a great deal to do with not including the words that I have suggested.

One has only to look at the rest of the United Kingdom, where it is clear that highly recognisable regions have constituencies described by reference to two places. Some members of the Committee may have such constituencies. I now represent the constituency of Stone, but there was a time when it was Stafford and Stone, because that part of the geographical area was considered sufficiently important historically and in terms of community and territory. That is why so many constituencies have double names. I believe that some in Scotland even have three names. That is much better from the point of view of the people who live there, because it gives them a sense of contiguity with the electoral process and a sense of identity. Therefore, I entirely repudiate the Minister's arguments.

With respect to regionality, I have seen maps—I am not saying that they are official, although they have semi-official status—on which parts of Normandy are incorporated for the purposes of European electoral and development regions into the south-east of England. We know the arguments about regionality with respect to Northern Ireland and Ireland, and that raises a pivotal question with respect to relations between the north and south of Ireland.

The problem is partly that the relationship between name and place does not recognise distance. Therefore, the fact that Gibraltar would be added in to, say, the south-west is without prejudice to the fact that it could easily be with, say, Northern Ireland or Scotland. However, the significance is that Gibraltar is composed of people who are citizens and who have an absolute right to be recognised as an identifiable part of whatever combined region is created.

Gibraltar is not part of the United Kingdom because it is not integrated into it. There are jurisdictional consequences and implications for the executive, judicial and legislative areas. Gibraltar is not jurisdictionally part of the United Kingdom for those or any other purpose. Clause 8 recognises that it will be combined with another region, not integrated into or included in it. The word ''combined'' has been carefully selected to ensure that the language of integration is avoided. We must bear that important point in mind. The Bill completely ignores Gibraltar's constitutional autonomy and jurisdictional separateness and treats it for executive, judicial and legislative purposes as an integrated part of the United Kingdom. I trust that the Minister will take that on board as the discussion continues, because there will be further stages and the Bill will go to the House of Lords.

Gibraltar's legislature is given no role in the legislative process. Its Executive is treated like a United Kingdom local council, as we see in clauses 19 and 21. The competence and jurisdiction of its judiciary is to be excluded. The provisions, therefore, are intrinsically colonial in nature and mentality and, by excluding Gibraltar from the name of the combined region, the Bill effectively puts the seal on that.

Both the people and the territory, not just the people, should be enfranchised. That is the overriding principle for Gibraltar. If we are to enfranchise the territory, we must accommodate its legal and constitutional status and institutions. If we do not do so, has Parliament really enfranchised the territory or merely included its people in a United Kingdom constituency? If the latter is the case, the Government will have been driven, against their will, as with the previous Government through the Denise Matthews case, to recognise a principle laid down by the European Convention. However, for reasons that I have given, they do so de minimis and without proper consultation and do not recognise what amendment No. 46, by including the words ''and Gibraltar'', would demonstrate.

Question put, That the amendment be made:—

The Committee divided: Ayes 4, Noes 9.

Mr William Cash (Stone, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 48, in

clause 10, page 5, line 28, after 'Commission', insert

'who shall consult the Boundary Committee of their Commission and/or the Boundary Commissions'.

Mr Frank Cook (Stockton North, Labour)

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

Amendment No. 52, in

clause 11, page 6, line 19, after 'Commission', insert

'who shall consult the Boundary Committee of their Commission and/or the Boundary Commissions'.

Amendment No. 61, in

clause 16, page 9, line 13, after 'Commission', insert

'who shall consult the Boundary Committee of their Commission and/or the Boundary Commissions'.

I remind hon. Members that we have already touched on the issues in the amendments but have not discussed them specifically, so I anticipate and will insist on a tight debate.

Mr William Cash (Stone, Conservative)

I entirely endorse your comments, Mr. Cook, and will do my best to comply. We have discussed the principle and it is important for the Minister to be given the opportunity to reply.

I simply want to put on the record that the amendments relate to clauses 10, 11 and 16. In each case, the object of the exercise is to ensure that the Electoral Commission has an obligation to consult in the context in which I used the word earlier, but also, as a matter of principle, properly to consult on matters that arise in the context of those clauses. That is a slightly different state of affairs from that which we discussed previously in that we were discussing the Lord Chancellor's order-making powers. We are now dealing with the impact on Gibraltar and the different places in the combined region. There is a list in section 1 of the European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002, so we know what it comprises and that questions relating to Northern Ireland and Scotland and so on need to be taken into account. The amendment is a spur to the Electoral Commission so that we can be sure that the whole process is dealt with as comprehensively as possible.

Ms Yvette Cooper (Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department; Pontefract & Castleford, Labour)

Many of the same arguments apply to the amendment as to the earlier groups of amendments that we discussed, and the same issues apply to Gibraltar as to making a decision about the number of MEPs.

First, nothing in the Bill prevents the Electoral Commission from consulting the boundary committees and commissions should it so choose. Secondly and perhaps more importantly, it is not clear what relevance the considerations of the boundary commissions or committees will have in the choice of which region Gibraltar should be included with. The boundary commissions for each country of the UK make decisions only about Westminster parliamentary boundaries and that has no relation to parliamentary regional boundaries, so it is not clear how their considerations would apply to the decision on which region Gibraltar should be combined with. The boundary committees will not consider anything that is likely to have an impact on the boundaries of the regions and, therefore, on which region Gibraltar should be part of during the next couple of years. As I set out in the earlier discussion, recommendations to change county boundaries can be made only if there is express instruction from the Secretary of State. There is no such instruction to recommend changes to those county boundaries so that is not under consideration and it is not likely to change before the 2004 elections.

Mr William Cash (Stone, Conservative)

The Minister has a rather engaging habit of answering some questions by simply stating the position, rather than giving a reason for her argument. The fact that the Secretary of State has the role of issuing instructions with regard to county regions does not answer the question whether there are issues relating to the role of a boundary commission or committee with respect to the area of that county and its possible impact on others. She seems to be saying that there is no mechanism, other than through local government and with respect to normal general elections, to allow the boundary commissions to be involved.

Ms Yvette Cooper (Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department; Pontefract & Castleford, Labour)

I am saying that the Electoral Commission can consult the boundary commissions and committees if it chooses to, but it is not appropriate to include in the Bill that it must, because it is not clear that there is anything that the boundary commissions or committees are currently considering that is relevant to the Electoral Commission's decision. The boundaries of the regions are not about to change. They are clear. They are not currently being considered by the boundary committees or the boundary commissions. Indeed the boundary commissions would never look at anything that was likely to impact on the boundaries of the European parliamentary region, because they just look at the Westminster parliamentary boundaries.

I would be happy to accept the amendment if the boundary commissions were considering something that was fundamental to the decision about which region Gibraltar should be combined with, but they are not doing anything at the moment that is central or even relevant to that decision. If the Electoral Commission takes a different view or if the boundary commissions or committees themselves take a different view it will be open for them to be consulted as part of this process. That is right.

However, I do not see the need to put them in the Bill as consultees when I have not heard any argument why they would add something significant and substantial in the next period, given that the decision about which region Gibraltar has to be combined with has to be taken in time for the 2004 elections.

That is another significant issue. Even if the boundary committees were considering changes to county boundaries that would have a knock-on effect on the regional boundaries, the Electoral Commission would still have to take its decision at one point. It could not simply anticipate what might happen in the future if decisions have not been taken. For those reasons we should reject the amendments. I completely accept that consultation on which region Gibraltar should be combined with should be as wide as possible. The Electoral Commission would accept that too. It would take its responsibilities very seriously. However, I do not see the need to add the reference to the boundary commissions or committees to the Bill.

Mr William Cash (Stone, Conservative)

In the light of those remarks and in the hope and belief that the Minister's views will be communicated to the Electoral Commission, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 10 ordered to stand part of the Bill.