New Clause 1 - Requirement of oath or affirmation
Crown Employment (Nationality) Bill
4:45 pm
Mr Dominic Grieve (Shadow Attorney General, Home, Constitutional & Legal Affairs; Beaconsfield, Conservative)
I have not sought to lengthen the debate on the other clauses, and we can wrap up this debate by reference to clause 1 and to the new clause and new schedule.
At the outset, I should say that the new clause is an imperfect document. I did my best in a rather short period to draft something for the Committee, and it serves as a probing amendment. I am conscious that those in the office have changed the new clause in one distinct way. They did so for good reasons because they felt that it might have been unsuitable for consideration as originally drafted. The change was made by adding the words:
''by virtue of this Act''.
That has the effect of confining an affirmation of loyalty as a Crown servant to those who would be affected by the Act, thereby discriminating between those who were foreigners seeking to take advantage of the Act, and those who were not. I say to the Minister and the hon. Member for Hendon that that was not my original intention. I would have preferred a more general, short affirmation of loyalty and discharge without fear or favour of the office of a civil servant applying to anyone who becomes a Crown servant, and I may return to dealing with that matter differently at a later stage.
I am aware that many Crown servants have to sign the Official Secrets Act, but that is a slightly different case, and does not deal with the issue that the public would want addressed. Those who are becoming Crown servants will serve their fellow citizens, and they should by some small affirmation make it clear that they understand the nature of their work and the duty that it places on them. I cannot help thinking that many people becoming Crown servants might welcome such a process. It is not onerous in any way, and if someone were to find it so, it would raise a question mark in my mind as to why they did.
I tabled the new clause because I thought it met the objectives of the hon. Member for Hendon while dealing with the slight reservations I expressed when we discussed clause 1. I am mindful of the fact that the drafting of the clause—which may be the only way it can be drafted for our consideration—has the effect of restricting it to those who are taking advantage of the provisions of the Act. I say candidly that that is not a satisfactory situation, but as it is the only way I could bring the matter before the Committee, I thought that it was still right to do so.
I shall be interested to hear the Government's response from the Minister, because it is important—whether we are dealing with someone working in a benefits office making decisions on who gets what or whoever—that people should have a sense of confidence that Crown servants understand the importance of their role, as it affects the rights of their fellow citizens.