Groceries Code Adjudicator Bill [Lords] (Programme) (No. 3) Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Groceries Code Adjudicator Bill [Lords] (Programme) (No. 3)

Steve McCabe Excerpts
Tuesday 26th February 2013

(11 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Christopher Chope Portrait Mr Chope
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I do not think that Front Benchers needed any telegraph messages from my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Philip Davies) or me, because one of the precursors to this Bill was a private Member’s Bill in the previous Parliament that my hon. Friend fought against line by line, in which I joined and supported him. The Bill before us is one that several colleagues and I are still very concerned about. The fact that I did not speak on Second Reading is not an argument that can be used against me, because now we have the chance to consider amendments, whereas on Second Reading we would only have been able to flag up general concerns, and I did not think that necessary because I had done so previously.

Christopher Chope Portrait Mr Chope
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will give way once more and then I must finish.

Steve McCabe Portrait Steve McCabe
- Hansard - -

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, and I do not wish to prolong this debate on the programme motion. Is it not fair to say that at the time of Second Reading the country was not engulfed in the anxiety about the food chain that has arisen subsequently, and that it would be a disaster if there were not enough time to debate at least amendments 34 and 35, which cover matters that are on the public’s mind?

Christopher Chope Portrait Mr Chope
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman makes a good point. The amendments in the first group include two new clauses in my name, which have been driven by the fact that this issue concerns more than just the United Kingdom. We are talking about a very complicated global supply chain, and we need further explanation of how the Bill will impact on that.

I have severe reservations about changing the programme motion. It is indicative of the fact that this Government are lacking in self-confidence. Why do they not have the self-confidence to allow us to debate these issues for a whole day on Report, as they originally intended? Why do they wish to close down debate? Are they frightened of scrutiny?