Clause 1, which is the essence of the Bill, enshrines the principle of applying all international development aid to the reduction of poverty. The definition of the reduction of poverty needs exploration through the normal means of amendment and discussion, so that we are entirely clear what it means and what the Secretary of State's intention is. That definition is not easy, and it is not intended to be, because the Secretary of State needs flexibility to administer her budget, which cannot be examined in a court of law. We accept that. That kind of thing should be discussed and needs to be discussed, which may take some time.
Friend clearly makes an important point.
The Report stage is the only occasion on which the House as a whole has an opportunity to address those important questions. The motion is entirely unnecessary, and it is detrimental to the reputation of the House that we should push it through. I shall not go through all the clauses, as that would be wasting time, but in the debate I raised the question of whether humanitarian aid should be closely defined, so that it will be clear that such aid will not be used for spurious political purposes. The matter requires thorough exploration. We must examine how a poverty-focused Bill will work in relation to the overseas territories.