All 1 Debates between Lord Mackay of Clashfern and Lord King of Bridgwater

Wed 16th Nov 2016
Investigatory Powers Bill
Lords Chamber

Ping Pong (Lords Hansard): House of Lords & Ping Pong (Lords Hansard): House of Lords

Investigatory Powers Bill

Debate between Lord Mackay of Clashfern and Lord King of Bridgwater
Ping Pong (Lords Hansard): House of Lords
Wednesday 16th November 2016

(7 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: HL Bill 70-I Motion to be moved on consideration of Commons reasons (PDF, 76KB) - (15 Nov 2016)
Lord King of Bridgwater Portrait Lord King of Bridgwater (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, said that a majority in this House supported the noble Baroness, Lady Hollins, in her amendment, but there is an even bigger majority in this House for ensuring that the Bill becomes law. We are now dealing with a very serious threat, a very serious situation, in which the provisions in the Investigatory Powers Bill are important. As your Lordships know, if the Bill does not make progress now, with the sunset clause on the present arrangements we would be naked in having no provision in law to govern the working of investigatory powers. There is absolutely no doubt that the noble Baroness has done the right thing. We could not possibly go on with this and provoke that risk at this time. Whatever the merits of these amendments—and I have not gone deeply into their merits—there is no doubt that I speak for the overwhelming majority in this House when I say that the Bill has got to become an Act soon so that we have proper provisions in place to defend our country and our citizens against the risks they might otherwise face.

Lord Mackay of Clashfern Portrait Lord Mackay of Clashfern (Con)
- Hansard - -

I express my gratitude for the responsible attitude the noble Baroness has taken in this respect. I know how deeply she feels about the amendment she put forward. Of course, there is good journalism and less good journalism. I am glad to see the noble Lord, Lord Myners, in his place. It is possible to distinguish between what he was talking about and the feeling in respect of Section 40. I particularly want to emphasise the Minister’s words—that this is to be a genuine consultation; in other words, I take it that the Government have not yet made up their mind on this question and therefore, it will be worth while for anyone who has a point of view to express it. Even though the consultation period is slightly shorter than before, it is over Christmas and the New Year, which is perhaps the best time to generate good feelings.