Schedule 1 - Certification commissioner

Northern Ireland (Offences) Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 2:45 pm on 8 December 2005.

Alert me about debates like this

Amendment proposed: No. 154, in schedule 1, page 15, line 28, leave out ‘is granted’ and insert ‘applies for’.—[Mr. Laurence Robertson.]

Question put, That the amendment be made:—

The Committee divided: Ayes 12, Noes 16.

Division number 8 Nimrod Review — Statement — Schedule 1 - Certification commissioner

Aye: 11 MPs

No: 15 MPs

Aye: A-Z by last name

NOES

Question accordingly negatived.

Amendment proposed: No. 155, in schedule 1, page 15, line 28, at end insert—

‘(1A)The commissioner shall consult, and have regard to the views of, the Northern Ireland Victims Commissioner about arrangements to be made in fulfilling his duties under sub-paragraph (1).’.—[Mr. Laurence Robertson.]

Question put, That the amendment be made:—

The Committee divided: Ayes 12, Noes 16.

Division number 9 Nimrod Review — Statement — Schedule 1 - Certification commissioner

Aye: 11 MPs

No: 15 MPs

Aye: A-Z by last name

NOES

Question accordingly negatived.

Amendment proposed: No. 156, in schedule 1, page 15, line 28, at end insert—

‘(1A)It is the duty of the commissioner to secure that appropriate arrangements are made—

(a)to allow representations from victims about the case of each person who applies for a certificate of eligibility;

(b)to have regard to the views of victims about the case of each person who applied for a certificate of eligibility;

(c)to give the victims the reasons for his decision to grant or refuse a certificate of eligibility in every case.’.—[Mr. Laurence Robertson.]

Question put, That the amendment be made:—

The Committee divided: Ayes 12, Noes 16.

Division number 10 Nimrod Review — Statement — Schedule 1 - Certification commissioner

Aye: 11 MPs

No: 15 MPs

Aye: A-Z by last name

NOES

Question accordingly negatived.

Question proposed, That this schedule be the First schedule to the Bill.

Photo of Sylvia Hermon Sylvia Hermon UUP, North Down

I rise to argue that schedule 1 should not be included in the Bill, and I say so having listened with patience to the Minister’s explanation regarding the certification commissioner. He has not explained what criteria will be used to appoint the certification commissioner. I am particularly offended that we are being asked to vote through, in the schedule, the expenditure of public money. Paragraph 3 says:

“The Secretary of State is to pay such remuneration, fees and allowances as he considers appropriate to, or in respect of, the commissioner.”

I hope that hon. Members will join me in refusing to support the schedule, when we know that the certification commissioner will not enjoy public confidence in Northern Ireland. I am sorry that, when the Minister was given the opportunity under the previous set of amendments to improve the status of, and respect for, the certification commissioner, he did not take it. If the Bill makes it to the statute books, the Minister will remember that he was offered a prime opportunity to enhance the reputation and stature of the certification commissioner. The words “The Secretary of State should take the advice of” did not appear in the amendment; there was simply a duty to consult the Northern Ireland victims commissioner, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and the Chief Constable of the PSNI. The Minister has   single-handedly refused to accept that amendment. We are invited under schedule 1 to agree to the spending of public money on the pay, remuneration, fees and allowances of a certification commissioner.

As I say, the Minister has refused to enhance the status of that commissioner, however ghastly his job will be. The second reason why I am particularly aggrieved is that in an earlier exposition on the difference between the appeals commissioners and the certification commissioner the Minister himself, as anyone who checks Hansard will see, drew attention, perhaps inadvertently, to the fact that under clause 13

“the Secretary of State must have regard to the desirability of the commissioners, as a group, commanding widespread acceptance throughout the community in Northern Ireland.”

Perhaps the Minister will explain that. For whatever reason, nowhere in the Bill—not in clause 2 and certainly not in the schedule—is there an indication that the certification commissioner should command widespread acceptance throughout the community in Northern Ireland. Without any justification, the Minister differentiated one office holder, the certification commissioner, who will be handsomely paid public money, and the appeals commissioners, who clause 13 states should command widespread acceptance.

I cannot in conscience support schedule 1 unless the Minister stands up and explains why there are such significant differences. Even if he does, I shall vote against it and encourage others to do so. This is a heavy responsibility; we are to spend public money on someone who will never command widespread public acceptance in Northern Ireland. I ask Committee members to look into their consciences and support me in rejecting schedule 1.

Photo of David Hanson David Hanson The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office

Schedule 1 sets out the related appointments and duties of the certification commissioner, such as the terms of the establishment of the office of the commissioner, including tenure, remuneration, allowances, staff and premises and it gives the Secretary of State discretion in that respect. It also obliges the commissioner to produce an annual report to the House of Commons on his or her activities during the year. We have considered and discussed the amendments relating to victims and clause 2 has been accepted. The schedule also provides for information for victims and for the certification commissioner office’s role. The schedule includes a parliamentary disqualification for the holder of the post: no Member of Parliament, of the Northern Ireland Assembly, of the Scottish Parliament or of the Welsh Assembly can hold the post of certification commissioner.

I say to the hon. Member for North Down that I am happy to take questions, but we have covered the role of the certification commissioner in detail. I know that she wanted the work of the Committee to go further on the issue of victims and that we have had difficulties today in our discussion of that issue. However, if she votes against the schedule, she will vote against part 5 of the Bill, which is about giving information to   victims, as well as against the establishment of the post, the annual report to Parliament and the parliamentary disqualification. I am sure that, on reflection, she would not wish to do that.

Photo of Sylvia Hermon Sylvia Hermon UUP, North Down

As the Bill stands, the existence of the certification commissioner is without any limit in time. Unless the Bill is amended, for years to come, only when a person has a turn of conscience or the PSNI eventually gets sufficient information on them might they apply for a certificate of eligibility. In voting on the schedule, we may be voting the office of the certification commissioner through for years to come, which means that we shall have to pay for it for years to come. How much does the Minister estimate that it will cost the public Exchequer? How much are my constituents and the people of Northern Ireland being asked to pay for this wretched office?

Photo of David Hanson David Hanson The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office 3:00, 8 December 2005

As yet, we have not set a final salary for the post, nor have we established what back-up and support will be required, because that will depend on the work load. If the hon. Lady will allow me, however, I can give the example of the chief commissioner of the Human Rights Commission, whose current salary is in the region of £55,000 to £70,000 per annum. We anticipate that the chief certification commissioner’s salary will fall within that range, although we would be prepared to pay more for an exceptional candidate if necessary.

I envisage the commissioner being supported by a very small secretariat, which would potentially be headed by a former or current senior civil servant. It might also provide support for the appeals commissioners. In managing the progress of the post with the Secretary of State, I shall be looking to restrict costs as far as possible. I hope that that gives the hon. Lady some idea. We have left paragraphs 3 and 4 flexible to give the Secretary of State the necessary flexibility at the time of the appointment.

I give the Committee an undertaking that should the Bill complete its passage through both Houses and receive Royal Assent, I shall lay a ministerial statement before the House prior to the appointment of the certification commissioner. It will detail his annual budget, his salary and the cost of the support mechanism for him so that hon. Members on both sides of the House are aware of the cost of his post. I hope that that helps to meet the hon. Lady’s concerns.

Photo of Peter Robinson Peter Robinson DUP, Belfast East

I want to put it clearly on the record that although the Minister sought to score a point off the hon. Lady by suggesting that she would be voting against a small right for victims if she voted against the schedule, she and everybody who opposes it do so because its provisions are inadequate.

Photo of David Hanson David Hanson The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office

I am grateful for that intervention, but let me make it clear that I am not trying to score a point off the hon. Member for North Down; I am trying to handle the Committee in a way that achieves consensus and civilised discussion of the points as far as possible. I was simply pointing out that if the hon.   Lady votes against the schedule, having already considered clause 2 and put in place the certification commissioner’s role, she will be voting down the salary, the support mechanisms, the annual report to Parliament and the current registration and support for victims. I recognise that she does not feel that some of those provisions are adequate, but if she voted against the provisions on the basis of the simple concern that she initially raised about the salary, that would have implications for other aspects of the Bill. Should the schedule be defeated, the only provision for victims, the commissioner’s salary, the remuneration, the annual report to Parliament and the parliamentary disqualification would not be included, even though the Committee has already agreed to clause 2.

Photo of Jeremy Hunt Jeremy Hunt Shadow Minister (Work and Pensions)

If the Minister is not prepared to accept the rejection of the schedule, is he prepared to concede anything at all in Committee to strengthen the rights of victims? In keeping with the pattern on previous days, he has been conciliatory in tone but has not been prepared to make a single concession when it comes down to it.

Photo of David Hanson David Hanson The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office

I have listened to the debate. I know that the hon. Gentleman is a new Member, but he will be aware that there is a variety of parliamentary procedures for dealing with these matters, including Report, Third Reading and the House of Lords stage. The way in which I am approaching the Bill is to reflect on what is said in Committee and argue the case for what I believe. However, amendments might be forced on us in another place and we might have to reflect on them. I cannot say that the Bill that commences its parliamentary passage on First Reading will be the same Bill that completes the parliamentary process, but I am trying to argue the case for the Bill as drafted, and I believe that the schedule has an important purpose. It provides a salary and support staff, gives support to victims and provides for an annual report to be put before Parliament. That is why I commend it to the Committee.

Question put, That this schedule be the First schedule to the Bill:—

The Committee divided: Ayes 16, Noes 11.

Division number 11 Nimrod Review — Statement — Schedule 1 - Certification commissioner

Aye: 15 MPs

No: 11 MPs

No: A-Z by last name

NOES

Question accordingly agreed to.

Schedule 1 agreed to.