Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Bill [HL]

While I welcome everything that was said by the noble Baroness, Lady Verma, there were bits of what she said that were a bit grumpy. I would like to say something about the grumpy bits. First, it is very rare for a Private Member’s Bill to have government support and to reach the statute book. I can think of the Great Reform Act 1832, which started as a Private Member’s Bill. I can think of Roy Jenkins’s Obscene Publications Bill, and Sidney Silverman’s Bill to abolish capital punishment. I think that homosexuality ceased to be a crime because of a Private Member’s Bill, and there was David Steel’s Bill on abortion. It is very rare, and therefore when it happens it does not really create precedents. For example, there has never been a Private Member’s Bill in the Moses Room in Grand Committee before. That is a sort of precedent, and it is a very desirable one in this case, which I do not suppose will be emulated for many other Private Members’ Bills unless the Government show their support. Secondly, when my inadequate four-page Bill was published, it was supported by the shadow Cabinet of Her Majesty’s Official Opposition, which considered it; and that was made clear on Second Reading. There was only one very minor bit that the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, queried, which has been dealt with. I do not believe that the government changes have changed any of the principles of the Bill, nor do I believe that there has been a lack of support. So far as consultation is concerned, I have put it in the Library and on the web, and it is all available. I am only a private Member, I am not the Government, but we have done a pretty good job on consultation. I hope that those words will remove grumpiness.