Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: I do not know that that is a reasonable question; it is a bit of a mixed grill. I shall give the hon. Gentleman his answers in writing. I can say now, however, that we believe in a degree of protection for our industries —why should we not? Nevertheless, I do not hesitate to add that a future Labour Government would introduce selective import controls if the economy ever returned to its...
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: It is a shame.
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. We should suspend the House for 10 minutes. I an extremely concerned about our honourable visitor—[Interruption.]
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: We should suspend the sitting—[Interruption.]
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: If you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, remember, I mentioned that I had to go through some of the Bill's background to try to illustrate what the amendment meant in the broadest sense of the word, and I shall try to do that. The hon. Member for Wanstead and Woodford has referred to the category which we are describing. The Bill's sponsors and I feel deeply about that. There is another category of...
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: The signal was quite clear. At one stage we were told, in essence, that the Government would steamroller the Bill if the compensation advisory board was kept intact. It was suggested that we could discuss other elements of the Bill that would give some recognition to the principles that I have been trying to establish. For example, on the question of bereavement damages, the Solicitor-General...
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: I did so simply because 5 May had been chosen as the date for the Committee stage to begin. To benefit from the flexible approach to the principles of the Bill that the Government were showing at the time and that the Solicitor-General has now evinced, I delayed until the final day for private Members' Bills.
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: Will the consultations be with the organisations which have given me such invaluable help with my Bill? Will public and voluntary organisations, victim support groups and bodies such as CRUSE be consulted?
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: The hon. Gentleman says that I said some very critical and telling things about it. In what context does he suggest that I made those comments?
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: I hope that the speech by the hon. Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Arbuthnot) was not motivated by the fact that he is a member of Lloyd's. The insurers are very much involved in the legislation that we have discussed and which might be forthcoming. I would ask him in the best possible way whether he has a direct interest in the matter.
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: I have pointed out that in any new scheme that was introduced and inaugurated by the House, considerable time would be given for such companies to assess values, increase premiums and so on. We have discussed the matter. It was part of my Bill that the compensation advisory board would not administer any decision for about two years. That would have provided the various organisations involved...
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: I am glad that my right hon. Friend has mentioned the New Zealand scheme. It is a similar scheme. It provides compensation for personal accident victims, regardless of fault. The scheme came into force on 1 April 1974. It is working. It abolishes claims for personal injuries arising directly or indirectly out of accidents and substitutes a right to compensation from a statutory corporation...
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: I was not aware of that. The Chamber is a fount of knowledge. The purpose of our dialogue in this place is to acquaint hon. Members with knowledge and facts. The hon. Gentleman referred to an extreme case. We are talking about a principle that, in the main, has assisted hundreds of thousands of people with their legitimate rights to compensation. One can always quote the one-off selective...
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: The hon. Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Arbuthnot) is at least consistent in his criticisms of personal injury compensation and the category of persons who receive it. On Second Reading he made similar points and I and other hon. Members tried to reconcile them. We have never denied that the amount of money payable in such circumstances is incalculable. We have said consistently that...
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: I warmly associate myself with the remarks of the hon. Member for Arundel (Mr. Marshall), which dealt with an ideal objective. As he said, the aims and objectives of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association are to achieve an all-party approach to vast international problems. He referred to the purposeful work being done by the two organisations. It has led to the creation of what we call a...
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Far be it for me to question your judgment and your ability to assess a situation that inevitably conflicts with the rules of the House, but I listened to your ruling with some dismay and disappointment because it means that the Bill will be hijacked to a large extent. Nevertheless, I honourably accept your ruling, Mr. Speaker, in view of your long experience...
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what discussions he has had with fellow European Ministers of Sport on producing a common European football identity card.
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: Is it not a fact that European Ministers laughed out of court the Minister for Sport's proposal for a common European football identity card, which was also condemned by the European Football Association? It is their belief and ours that it would militate against genuine football supporters as against the hooligan element. Can the Minister explain why Britain is once again out of step with Europe?
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: rose in his place and claimed to move, That the Question he now put. Question, That the Question be now put, put and agreed to.
Mr Lawrence Cunliffe: I shall make two points to the hon. Lady. First, the cardinal principle of my Bill is not to deal with fault or liability, which is the job of the courts, but to raise the level of compensation. I have extreme sympathy with the two cases that the hon. Lady quoted, but it is not for me to judge where responsibility lies. If possible, I should like my Bill to embrace all types of personal...
