This has been an interesting debate and I am grateful for the acknowledgement of the changes made as a result of this set of amendments. I am pleased better to have informed the right hon. and learned Member for—is it still Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg)? [Interruption.] Well, it changes every election. [Interruption.] I had forgotten that Grantham is Labour now! It is significant that the right hon. and learned Gentleman is better informed about the amendment.
A number of slightly odd claims have been made. The hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) talked about the Prison Service over the next 100 years—a much longer time frame than I have in mind. He then said that there would always be pressure on the Prison Service. I have clocked that; we bear it mind, because at some stage over the next 100 years, there may well be a Conservative Government. I can offer the hon. Gentleman some fraternal advice—not to be too free and easy with the suggestion that if there were a Conservative Government, there would never be any problems with prisons. I do not believe that that would be the case.
The hon. Gentleman then said that implementing the law quickly could lead to some ““terrible problem””. That is nonsense. I never said that it would lead to a terrible problem. I have been careful in what I said, as have my right hon. and hon. Friends. What I have said is that we need time to assess the situation, and we do. I apologise to the House for having to say that, but it just happens to be true.
To my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Mr. Dismore), the Chairman of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, I say that as well as undertaking to publish at least an annual report on progress, which I am happy to do, we will certainly look carefully into implementing these measures by stages. I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood) for saying that he at least trusts me—he then made it clear that he certainly would not trust a Minister in a Conservative Government, and we have noted that too. We do intend to take such action; otherwise, we would not put such a provision in the Bill. The quicker we can make progress, the less people will have to look into a crystal ball, because they will be able to see from the action taken that we are doing it.
I urge the whole House to recognise that considerable progress has been made, and that it is now time for agreement, both on what is in the Bill, as we hope, and on what I have said.
Question put:—
The House divided: Ayes 301, Noes 188.
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Jack Straw
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 18 July 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
463 c346-7 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:56:12 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412252
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412252
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412252