Clause 12 - Sections 10 and 11: supplementary
European Parliament (Representation) Bill
3:00 pm
Mr William Cash (Stone, Conservative)
We now come to points that are fairly similar to those that we have already discussed, because clause 12 relates to matters supplementary to clauses 10 and 11.
Clause 12 states that an order under clause 10 or 11 will be empowered to
''modify, exclude or apply, with or without modifications . . . any provision made by or under an Act (including any provision which is modified by or under this Act or which confers power to make subordinate legislation) . . . and . . . any provision of the law of Gibraltar.''
We have probably covered this subject extensively enough, because it raises the very questions that we have just discussed. However, there is grave concern in Gibraltar about any order made by the Lord Chancellor as a consequence of decisions taken by a Government who are going through with the Bill not with any great enthusiasm, but because they have been driven to it.
Even if we appreciate the point made by the Minister in respect of the previous clause that there has to be some degree of complementarity among the laws applying in the combined region, in Gibraltar and in the United Kingdom, we are none the less talking about a draconian power, which, as I understand it, has not been exercised for 50 years. At the very worst, an order could be made to exclude
''any provision of the law of Gibraltar.''
This is a pretty draconian and an extremely insulting provision. It certainly bears no relation to the good working relationship with the many thousands of electors in Gibraltar through their elected representatives in the House of Assembly and the legislature. Imagine if we were put in a similar position and somebody else—I hesitate to mention the European Union—came along and unilaterally knocked out our legislation. In the context that I have described, the difference is that there is at least a superficial indication that it is all part of a democratic process. In this case, it is simply a question of whether or not it is appropriate in a modern world for a Government, who have been moving towards greater human rights, democracy and constitutional correctness—I am not referring to the Government; I am talking about the Governments of the United Kingdom over the past 50 years—to recognise the integral and intrinsic rights of, in this case, the people of Gibraltar.
There was a more proactive invitation to accommodate the wishes of the people of the Falklands, but in this particular case to modify or exclude
''any provision of the law of Gibraltar''
is, by any standards, extremely draconian and offensive. I do not know what the Minister will say about it, although there is no doubt she will tell us that it is necessary. That would not be an answer, but I have got used to that in Committee. One or two of her recent comments have been moderately constructive, which is why I withdrew some amendments. In that constructive spirit, I hope that she will indicate that those offensive words can be removed, which would be a step in the right direction. The words are unnecessary, but we will hear what she has to say.
Clause 17 refers to the power to make regulations on a vast number of electoral matters. The Committee will know that I have already mentioned internal domestic reserved matters under the existing constitution of Gibraltar, which has been endorsed by the United Kingdom. If it has already been decided that electoral matters, which are matters of internal domestic concern, should be determined by the people of Gibraltar through their House of Assembly—they are such matters under British, let alone Gibraltarian, law—the provisions in clause 17(3), and in particular clause 17(3)(c) should be knocked out. Clause 17 states:
''This section applies to regulations under section 16 . . . such regulations may''.
Because our approach is not curmudgeonly or negative—we are open-minded and tolerant—we understand that such regulations should make consequential, supplementary provisions. Indeed, we even accept that they may make a provision extending or applying to Gibraltar or any part of the United Kingdom. However, we gib at the regulations on electoral matters, which are matters of internal, domestic law and therefore, by definition, questions of law for the United Kingdom under the 1969 Order in Council as well as for Gibraltar. Clause 17(3) states that those regulations may
''modify, exclude or apply . . . any provision made by or under an Act or any provision of the law of Gibraltar.''
I have the sense that the draftsman, whom I can observe through the prism at my disposal, is exceedingly intelligent and perceptive. He realises that there are a lot of bear traps here and that it is a problem to achieve symmetry between the legislative arrangements required. But I fear that he has taken the route of overkill. The consequence is that we have ended up with a Bill that goes too far in shifting the centre of gravity when a more constructive and medium position will ultimately be arrived at—I hope as a result of these discussions.
That is not just a technical question of legislative drafting. It is about good relations based on sensible democratic understandings between people faced with a difficult question. That is the key point. These days we have fallen into the trap, when faced with a difficulty, of trying to blast it out of the way and
obliterate it, when a constructive and sensible approach would be based on discussion.
We have discussed the matter sufficiently. I wait to hear what the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome has to say—he has nothing to say.