Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Bill (Business of the House) Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Home Office

Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Bill (Business of the House)

John Bercow Excerpts
Tuesday 15th July 2014

(9 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

Order. There is no time limit on speeches but, before I call the next speaker, I urge colleagues to bear in mind the interest of other colleagues in speaking in this debate on the business of the House motion and to reflect on the merits of getting on, without undue delay, to the central issues, which may be fully aired on Second Reading until 5 o’clock.

Malcolm Rifkind Portrait Sir Malcolm Rifkind (Kensington) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I shall abide by your request, Mr Speaker, and make just two brief comments on the points that have been raised.

First, Members needs to take it into account that the House is presented with emergency legislation in two sets of circumstances. The first is when a Government seek to extend their powers in some area. In such circumstances, the House has every reason to be very sceptical and concerned that it is being done through the medium of emergency legislation. There would have to be really exceptional circumstances to justify new powers of a kind that had not been used before.

We are told today—the House must make a judgment about this—that this is a different kind of emergency legislation, which has been seen in the past. Following a legal judgment, something that was thought to be lawful has potentially ceased to be lawful. The legislation is therefore necessary in order to continue with the status quo. That is, of course, a very different matter.

The second point that I want to make, very briefly, is about the concern over why the legislation was not prepared two or three months ago. It is obvious that there are two reasons. First, there are regulations that were made under the European directive. There is now uncertainty over whether those regulations might be successfully challenged. We therefore need clarification right away. Secondly, it is desirable to have all-party support if possible, particularly because it is emergency legislation. That takes time in the real world, particularly given that the Opposition have, quite reasonably, asked for additional announcements to be made in this area that are not specific to the legislation, but are relevant to it. Those factors point to why this process is not as unreasonable as it might otherwise sound.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

Order. The right hon. and learned Member for Kensington (Sir Malcolm Rifkind) has just offered a tutorial in succinctness. I hope that he had a significant number of attentive students.

--- Later in debate ---
None Portrait Several hon. Members
- Hansard -

rose—

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

Order. Notwithstanding what has been said about the truncated time that has been available for the tabling of amendments, I reiterate what I said yesterday afternoon in response to a point of order from the hon. Member for Rhondda (Chris Bryant), which is that Members will be free to table manuscript amendments for some time to come. If Members wish to do so, I am happy that that should happen, in recognition of the constraints under which they are operating. I hope that that is clear.