Mr Andrew Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information and statistics he has collated about complications experienced by recipients of the St. Jude Silzone heart valve; and if he will make a statement.
Mr Andrew Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if he will take measures to ensure that all surviving UK recipients of the St. Jude silzone heart valve are informed why these valves have been withdrawn from the market; and if he will make a statement; (2) if he will take measures to ensure that all UK recipients of the St Jude silzone heart valve are encouraged to contact for advice the...
Mr Andrew Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what communication his Department has had with relevant authorities in the Irish Republic regarding the implications for British and Irish citizens of the withdrawal from the market of the St Jude silzone heart valve; and if he will make a statement.
Mr Andrew Hunter: I acknowledge that the wording of amendment No. 25 may not be the best possible to achieve the desired objective. On that basis alone, I shall ask the Committee's leave to withdraw it. However, I believe that the amendment, imperfectly though it may have been worded, has drawn attention to fundamental issues to which we are entitled to return on Report. The Minister seemed to be in two...
Mr Andrew Hunter: The right hon. Gentleman makes the point emphatically: the situation is not as the Minister describes. I rest my case. Although I am unconvinced by the Minister's response, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Further consideration adjourned.—[Vernon Coaker.] Adjourned accordingly at thirteen minutes to Five o'clock till Thursday 1 April at...
Mr Andrew Hunter: I beg to move amendment No. 25, in clause 5, page 3, line 30, after 'shall', insert 'within his discretion'. This is the second of three amendments that I tabled on behalf of the DUP. Again, it is a quest for the reason for a change, although in this instance it returns, without apology, to the 2002 Act. As the explanatory notes to the Bill make clear, section 34 of that Act amends section...
Mr Andrew Hunter: I am aware that the 1998 Act was amended by the 2002 Act. I am concerned that the ombudsman has a role in what I believe to be a matter for the DPP alone. It is unnecessary to bring in the additional dimension of the ombudsman's activities, because the matter could be dealt with by the DPP, whose primary job is to assess whether there is any evidence, and whether the case is strong enough to...
Mr Andrew Hunter: I imagine that it was predictable that amendment No. 24 would give rise to a recitation of firmly held positions. That does not, of course, detract from the sincerity of the views held. I should like to turn briefly to the comments of the hon. Member for South Down, for whom I have more respect and regard than he sometimes appears to credit. I wish he would convey to us the realisation that...
Mr Andrew Hunter: Changes in society are reflected, as all institutions evolve over time. My objection is to the imposition of change through legislation. No further legislation is needed because of the balance that already exists in the Northern Ireland judiciary. Of course, as society changes over time, all institutions will reflect that. My quarrel is with legislation imposing a requirement for change....
Mr Andrew Hunter: My position on the stand part debate on clause 2 is very much the same as the position that I adopted on clause 1. Despite all the arguments that we have heard from the Government, I still believe that the concept of ''reflective of the community'' is fundamentally flawed and therefore wholly undesirable. I maintain that appointment to places on the commission should be based exclusively on...
Mr Andrew Hunter: I beg to move amendment No. 24, in clause 3, page 2, leave out lines 24 to 38.
Mr Andrew Hunter: The amendment is the first of three that I have tabled at the request and on behalf of the Democratic Unionist party. I hope that the Minister will recognise that in his reply. My place on the Committee is due to my having been nominated by the Democratic Unionist party. The purpose of amendment No. 24 is straightforward and transparent. It seeks to address an important part of our grave...
Mr Andrew Hunter: I asked the Minister to clarify whether there would be some formalised means of redress for an aggrieved person. Did I understand him to say that he does not intend to establish any procedures whereby someone who believes that the commission is not reflective of the community can take action?
Mr Andrew Hunter: I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for raising the issues covered by amendment No. 50, which I had not detected. It reveals a huge hole, as he said. The question is of the utmost seriousness, and the Government must surely pay attention to it. My initial reaction is that it is wholly unacceptable that, while the Government emphasise the idea of the commission as a whole being...
Mr Andrew Hunter: I appreciate that the hon. Gentleman's amendments are probing, but will he clarify one aspect of his thinking on amendment No. 3(9)(a)? Before any restoration of devolved government, which has been suspended due to ongoing violence and non-decommissioning, would he envisage Sinn Fein being entitled by statute to places on the commission?
Mr Andrew Hunter: I shall be equally brief, but I want to put on record concerns about the concept of ''reflective of the community''. On Second Reading, several hon. Members made the point that the experience of the Unionist community in Northern Ireland does not lead it to respond favourably, on first hearing, to such expressions as ''reflective of the community''. One need only look at the composition and...
Mr Andrew Hunter: Some of us would be more convinced by the Minister's explanation if the genesis of the Bill did not lie also in the Hillsborough joint declaration and the political intent of that declaration. Although the Minister seeks to justify the early creation of the commission, he fails to convince us if we bear in mind the political origins of the Bill.
Mr Andrew Hunter: I want to put on record the opposition of the Democratic Unionist party to clause 1. The reasons are known, so I do not need to rehearse them in detail. Simply, we cannot accept the Minister's argument that there is merit in the proposal to create the procedures for judicial appointment before devolved government has been reconstructed. We are aware of his argument, but it is found...
Mr Andrew Hunter: I echo the comments of other hon. Members in welcoming you to the Chair, Mr. Benton. In reply to my hon. Friend, I may say that I am heartily relieved to hear that this is a probing amendment. When I first read it, I reacted with incredulity, since at first sight it runs entirely counter to the main thrust of opposition to the Bill that our party set out on Second Reading: that aspects of the...
Mr Andrew Hunter: My hon. Friend scores a valid point. More seriously, in my judgment the further judicial appointments can be taken from elected party politicians, the better.
