House of Commons Hansard Debates for 21 Jan 1993

Column 499

Business of the House

3.30 pm

Mrs. Margaret Beckett (Derby, South) : Will the Leader of the House state the business for next week?

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton) : Yes, Madam. The business for next week will be as follows :

Monday 25 January----Second Reading of the National Lottery etc. Bill.

Money resolution (No. 2) relating to the Education Bill. Money resolution (No. 2) and Ways and Means resolution (No. 2) relating to the Housing and Urban Development Bill.

Tuesday 26 January----Opposition Day (9th allotted day). There will be a debate described as "The Crisis in the National Health Service" on an Opposition motion.

Motion relating to financial assistance to SCA Aylesford Ltd. Motion on the Food Protection (Emergency Prohibitions) (Oil and Chemical Pollution of Fish) Order.

Wednesday 27 January----Progress in Committee on the European Communities (Amendment) Bill, eighth day.

Mr. George Foulkes (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) : Described as progress.

Mr. Newton : I shall give the hon. Gentleman that one, and continue with the business statement :

Thursday 28 January----Further progress in Committee on the European Communities (Amendment) Bill, ninth day.

Friday 29 January----Private Members' Bills.

Monday 1 February----Yet more progress in Committee on the European Communities (Amendment) Bill, tenth day.

The House will also wish to know that European Standing Committees will meet on Wednesday 27 January at 10.30 am to consider European Community documents as follows :

Standing Committee A--Document No. 8066/92 relating to the creation of a combined transport network.

Standing Committee B--Document No. 8403/92 relating to the utilisation of immovable property on a timeshare basis.

[Wednesday 27 January :

European Standing Committee A

Relevant European Community Document

8066/92 Combined Transport

Relevant Report of the European Legislation Committee

HC 79-x (1992-93)

European Standing Committee B

Relevant European Community Document

8403/92 Timeshare

Relevant Report of the European Legislation Committee

HC 79-vi (1992-93).]

Mrs. Beckett : I thank the Leader of the House for his statement. It is becoming apparent that, with the concentration of parliamentary time on the Maastricht Bill, there is a growing danger that other matters of considerable importance will be neglected. I remind the right hon. Gentleman, for example, that both sides of the House have an interest in an early debate on the revenue support grant, and Opposition Members at least had anticipated that that

Column 500

debate might take place before the end of January, particularly in view of the predicted job losses in local authorities of all political shades.

I should like to press the right hon. Gentleman for an assurance that there will be a debate, in Government time, on the full public expenditure programme--a debate that we should normally expect to be scheduled for the near future.

Will the Leader of the House please ensure that there will be an early statement on the reorganisation of health authorities? This seems to be taking place almost by the back door. I understand that recent remarks by, I think, an Under-Secretary of State for Health indicated that the Government expect that the original figure of about 190 will ultimately be reduced to 85. A structural change of that magnitude should surely be reported properly in a statement to this House, but it has not been so reported.

Now that we have the report of the Select Committee on Employment and hope shortly to have the report of the Select Committee on Trade and Industry, the House expects the right hon. Gentleman to find time soon for a debate on the future of the coal industry.

Mr. Newton : The hon. Lady is perhaps overstating her case in raising the first point in a week in which we shall be dealing with two important matters as well as the European Communities (Amendment) Bill and a week in which the Opposition have been provided with a further Supply day.

The hon. Lady specifically asked about the revenue support grant orders. While, as she observed, they are not in the business for next week, I do not think she will have an infinite time to wait before she has the opportunity for which she evidently craves.

The answer to her public expenditure programme question is that there was a two-day debate on that matter in Government time before Christmas. In the coming few weeks, the departmental reports flowing from that will be published. It is perhaps in the wake of those publications that further consideration might be given to the point that she raised, but I cannot give a definite undertaking. I was surprised at the hon. Lady raising the point about health authorities, not because it is not an important issue but because, as it happens, next week an Opposition day debate is to be devoted to health service matters, and on that same day the Secretary of State for Health will be answering questions, which should provide some opportunity for those points to be raised.

I note what the hon. Lady said, perhaps predictably, about the Select Committee reports on coal. I would prefer not to add to what my right hon. Friend and the Minister of State said in answer to questions on that subject yesterday.

Mr. William Powell (Corby) : I draw my right hon. Friend's attention to early-day motion 1129 relating to war crimes in Yugoslavia and the need to establish an international court so that those who have committed crimes against humanity in the former Yugoslavia can be brought to trial.

[That this House notes the evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the former Yugoslavia provided by the Reports of Sir John Thomson, Ambassador Correll and his colleagues, Mr. Tadeusz Mazowiecki, the former Prime Minister of Poland and Dame Anne Warburton ; welcomes the Statement of 51 Foreign Ministers of the

Column 501

CSCE on 15th December 1992 calling for proposals including the possibility of the establishment of an ad hoc tribunal', as well as the Statement of 16th December 1992 by Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger calling for a second Nuremberg' which was followed in December 1992 by the United Nations General Assembly resolution urging the Security Council to consider recommending the establishment of an ad hoc International War Crimes Tribunal to try and punish those who have committed war crimes in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina when sufficient information has been provided by the Commission of Experts' ; and urges Her Majesty's Government to promote in the Security Council such a tribunal and to instruct the existing Commissioner of Experts to prepare the statute for such a tribunal.]

In view of today's report by Amnesty International confirming some of the most distressing evidence about rape being committed on a wide scale, and apparently with official sanction, in Yugoslavia, will my right hon. Friend make time available to enable the House to discuss how we can make further progress to establish an international tribunal, which is now accepted by Her Majesty's Government?

Mr. Newton : I cannot give my hon. Friend an immediate undertaking about a debate, but he will be well aware of the concern, to put it very mildly indeed, that the British Government have expressed about those matters, and we very much understand the views that my hon. Friend expresses. The United Nations commission of experts is due to report its findings and recommendations for further action to the United Nations Secretary-General at the end of this month. The British Government will take a close interest in what follows from that.

Mr. A. J. Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed) : May we have an early debate about hill livestock farming in view of the dismay in many parts of the country where hill sheep farming is the predominant agricultural activity at the cuts announced by the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in hill livestock compensatory allowances? Will the Leader of the House look at early-day motion 1208 and other motions which draw attention to the seriousness of the situation? [That this House calls on Her Majesty's Government to withdraw the Hill Livestock (Compensatory Allowances) (Amendment) Regulations 1993 (S.I., 1993, No. 70) dated 18th January 1993 pending the report of the Select Committee on Agriculture and further consultation with the industry on their level and effect, in the light of the clear evidence of depressed incomes in this sector and widespread impact on the fragile local economies of the hill areas concerned.]

Mr. Newton : I seek to keep abreast of early-day motions and others, but I cannot add to what I said on the subject this time last week. I acknowledge the right hon. Gentleman's concern, but he may agree that it is reasonable to expect him to acknowledge that, in view of the background to the matter, hill sheep farmers can expect to be considerably better off this year.

Mr. John Butcher (Coventry, South-West) : May we have a debate on the engineering industry and the role of the engineering profession in safeguarding our economic future and spearheading the recovery? Does my hon. Friend agree that, as part of that debate, it is important to

Column 502

examine the announcement made by the Jaguar Car Company today about the investment of £700 million in three new models, which will safeguard great tranches of the industrial engineering sectors not only in the midlands but nationally? Does he further agree that the proposals should be welcomed and examined for their significance?

Mr. Newton : I agree with my hon. Friend, and his sentiments extend over a longer period than the announcement today to which he referred. Decisions about motor car investment, and not least decisions about investment involving overseas firms coming here to make cars, have been an encouraging feature of the fundamental strengthening of Britain's manufacturing base.

Mr. Derek Enright (Hemsworth) : Will the Leader of the House undertake the Herculean task of finding the Secretary of State for Education, who these days seems to be skulking like Achilles in his tent? Will he bring him to the House to explain why, at a time when he is attempting to put through major education proposals, he so underestimates teachers that he offers them a rise of between nought and 1.5 per cent. and promises that they will never catch up on their pay. Is that not a disgrace?

Mr. Newton : It seems to me that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education is very much in evidence, with a series of announcements much welcomed by the public and very foolishly, in my view, opposed by Her Majesty's Opposition.

Mr. David Evennett (Erith and Crayford) : Will my right hon. Friend arrange an early debate on local government expenditure? We hear so often, particularly from councils run by the Labour party, that they are short of funds and they have not enough money to run the necessary social services and so forth, but we read in the newspapers that in Sheffield, for example, they are funding political offices for their Members of Parliament.

Madam Speaker : Order. May I tell the entire House that we are questioning a statement about business for next week. I shall not tolerate further questioning that does not relate strictly to the business statement ; but perhaps the Leader of the House would like to make some comment.

Mr. Newton : As the question has been asked, Madam Speaker, perhaps I might be allowed to make the point that of course local authorities must act within the law and they are answerable to various bodies, including the Audit Commission, which will no doubt take a keen and critical interest in the point to which my hon. Friend has adverted. I assume that, if this sort of help is being made available to some Members of Parliament in the city, it will be made available to all, including my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Patnick), who is sitting not far from me.

Rev. Martin Smyth (Belfast, South) : May we have a statement next week on Government intentions about pornography and obscenity, particularly in the light of developments in telecommunications and the possibility of our having videophones with a line into the home and sex lines that have been perturbing parents? It would be better to shut the stable door before the horse bolts.

Mr. Newton : I think that I would be right in saying that important aspects of that matter would be the

Column 503

responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for National Heritage, who will be answering questions on Monday next week.

Sir Anthony Grant (Cambridgeshire, South-West) : On Monday's business, does my right hon. Friend agree that a national lottery will bring great benefits to the arts, sport

Madam Speaker : Order, Order. Is the hon. Gentleman asking for a change in Monday's business because we are not debating the benefits, the merits or the demerits of anything but are dealing with the business for next week?

Sir Anthony Grant : Madam Speaker, I entirely accept that. My purpose is to obtain a little bit of clarity because, while recognising that there are strong views held the other way would my right hon. Friend not agree with me that what is entirely feeble and wet is to be undecided. Does he know whether the Opposition are still giving--

Madam Speaker : Order. That is a disallowed question. We must make some progress on these matters.

Mr. Robert Hughes (Aberdeen, North) : Has the Leader of the House seen early-day motion no. 1010 standing in my name and those of more than 60 of my hon. Friends referring to the report on the transfer of petroleum engineering division from London to Aberdeen?

[That this House notes that the Government's commitment to open government is proving to be paper thin as evidenced by Ministers' refusals to reply to legitimate letters from honourable Members as witnessed by the letter of 9th October from the honourable Member for Aberdeen North to the Minister of Energy asking for the publication of the Ernst and Young Report into the transfer of the PED from London to Aberdeen, which elicited the reply that a decision on the transfer would be made soon, but did not even mention the request for publication of this Report and the honourable Member for Aberdeen North's letter to the Prime Minister on 16th November drawing his attention to this error by the Minister for Energy and calling for the publication of the Report, which attracted the reply that the letter had been referred back to the original source of the dissatisfaction, namely the Department of Trade and Industry, for reply, which in turn elicited the reply from the President of the Board of Trade dated 30th November that a decision would be made soon on the transfer, but again ignoring the question as to publication ; therefore believes that this sorry saga of continued failure to answer a straight forward question makes the Prime Minister's and the Government's commitment to open government farcical ; and calls upon her Majesty's Government to publish the Ernst and Young Report immediately and in full.]

That independent report has been in the hands of the Minister for Energy since 5 October, more than three and a half months ago, and he will not say whether he will publish it or not. He keeps promising that a decision will be made soon. In view of the importance of this matter to the economy of Aberdeen--which needs more employment prospects, lest people think otherwise--will he ask the President of the Board of Trade or the Minister for Energy to make a statement next week so that we can resolve this matter and, in the interests of open government, get this report published as soon as possible?

Column 504

Mr. Newton : I do not know whether the hon. Member was frustrated in asking that question yesterday, which is when he would have had an opportunity to address it to my right hon. Friend or my hon. Friend the Minister of State. I am not in a position to add to what has been said previously, but, as he knows and has been told, decisions will be announced as soon as possible.

Mr. Patrick Cormack (Staffordshire, South) : Does my right hon. Friend accept that, whatever line one takes, there is unanimity in the House that the situation in Bosnia should be debated? I asked my right hon. Friend to try to arrange a debate before Christmas. He was exceptionally courteous and on one occasion said that he hoped to be able to arrange a debate before too long. How long is too long?

Mr. Newton : I am not able to give my hon. Friend the undertaking that he requests, and certainly not today. He will know that time has been provided this afternoon for a substantial debate on the deployment of British forces in relation to the middle east and on the Royal Air Force generally. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that my hon. Friend will be able to work in a reference in that debate ; but, of course, that would be subject to your view, Madam Speaker.

Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich) : Would the Leader of the House like to save the Select Committee some time and help to alleviate unemployment by getting the Secretary of State for Transport to announce next week that common sense is prevailing and he is abandoning rail privatisation?

Mr. Newton : That sounds like a triumph of hope over experience. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport is presenting his Bill today and expects to publish it tomorrow. I expect it to be debated not long after the period covered by today's business statement.

Mr. Graham Riddick (Colne Valley) : During which debate next week will I be able to say that Sheffield city council is sacking thousands of its employees and at the same time paying £55,000 to some hon. Members for office costs? Is that not another example of Labour waste and profligacy in local government?

Mr. Newton : I would be pushed to suggest to my hon. Friend a debate next week in which that would readily be in order. However, I draw his attention to the fact that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment will be answering questions on Wednesday. My hon. Friend may find that a useful steer.

Mr. David Alton (Liverpool, Mossley Hill) : Will a Minister from the Department of Employment be present for Monday's debate to answer the many questions that hon. Members will wish to put about the employment implications for Liverpool, Glasgow and Cardiff of the proposed national lottery legislation?

Mr. Newton : I cannot give the hon. Gentleman an instant promise, but I shall make sure that his point is drawn to the attention of my right hon. and hon. Friends in the Department of Employment.

Mr. Rod Richards (Clwyd, North-West) : During the substantial amount of time that has been allocated to the

Column 505

European Communities (Amendment) Bill, will there be time to discuss the fact that the MEP for Sheffield is not paying rent or rates for his office in that city?

Mr. Newton : I cannot find time for a debate on that matter, but I have already suggested the possibility of its being raised during Department of the Environment questions on Wednesday.

Mr. Bob Cryer (Bradford, South) : Will the Leader of the House arrange for a Home Office statement to be made next week on the law on wheel clamping? Early-day motion 1110 makes it clear that the law in Scotland is applied quite clearly and properly.

[That this House expresses concern at the growing practice of private and public organisations employing firms, often with a dubious background and whose employees have no adequate identification, which place wheel clamps on parked cars and then extort large sums of money for releasing the vehicle ; acknowledges that this can be a frightening experience especially on dark nights for single women ; and urges the Government to make clear that wheel clamping is illegal, extortion a criminal offence, and threats to remove vehicles a serious breach of the peace on which the police should take appropriate action.]

However, in this country spivs are going around clamping cars on land that is often used for car parking and the land owners are co-operating with them to extort sums of £50. There are threats to tow cars away, with the cost of returning a car being another £200. That is often happening to single women, and in a recent case a woman with a blind--

Madam Speaker : Order. All that the hon. Gentleman needs to do is to ask for a debate ; he does not need to go into details. We are all fully aware of the situation, I think.

Mr. Cryer : I am grateful to you, Madam Speaker, for endorsing what I am saying--that a debate is necessary and urgent, because the Home Office is delaying action.

Mr. Newton : I am sure that you, Madam Speaker, would wish me on your behalf to say that your words did not warrant quite the interpretation placed on them by the hon. Gentleman--at least, I hope that they did not.

On the basic issue, my right hon. Friend will shortly issue a consultation paper setting out the legal position as we understand it and seeking views on possible options for dealing with bad practice, which undoubtedly exists, in this area. Perhaps a statement could be considered at that time, although obviously I cannot give a commitment now.

Mr. Ian Taylor (Esher) : My right hon. Friend mentioned that on Tuesday there will be an Opposition debate entitled, I believe, "Reporting progress on the success of the NHS reforms". Will he have a word with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health to ensure that, in addition to other points in her speech, she will refer to the excellent work and contribution of the hospice movement? In particular, will my right hon. Friend note that in my constituency tomorrow the Princess Alice hospice will have its inaugural conference, "Palliative care through education", and is successfully opening its new education wing?

Mr. Newton : I am not sure that the hon. Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett) would wish me to validate my

Column 506

hon. Friend's rewrite of her description of the Opposition's debate, although of course it is one more acceptable to me.

As to the purport of my hon. Friend's question, the hospice movement is an important and often underestimated area in which we have greatly advanced public policy in recent years. Something that gave me great satisfaction when I had related responsibilities was the amount of additional support and help that we were able to give the hospice movement, with great success.

Mr. Tony Benn (Chesterfield) : Has the attention of the Leader of the House been drawn to a report in the first edition of The Daily Telegraph today that the President of Germany has been unable to ratify the Maastrict treaty because Herr Brunner, the former chief of staff of Herr Bangemann, has brought an action in the constitutional court claiming that the treaty is in breach of the German constitution? That report disappeared from later editions of The Daily Telegraph --[ Hon. Members :-- "What has this to do with next week's business?"] Well, the President of Germany cannot sign the Maastricht treaty until that matter is resolved. Can the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs be invited to make a statement before we resume the debate on the Maastricht treaty Bill next Wednesday and Thursday?

Mr. Newton : I gather that there have been some reports of that kind over a long time. I cannot undertake that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will make a statement. I do not need to rehearse my earlier remarks about next week's business for the House to know that there will be full opportunities for airing European issues.

Mr. James Paice (Cambridgeshire, South-East) : Notwithstanding tomorrow's business, may I impress on my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House the need for the Government to publish soon their own Sunday trading Bill ? Whatever the widespread range of views on how to resolve that issue, there is a clear consensus that something must be done. Although we recognise that the Maastricht Bill is taking up a vast amount of the time of the House, we all look forward to the opportunity of having a free vote, as outlined by my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary.

Mr. Newton : We all recognise the importance and difficulty of that issue, apart from the fact that the consensus that something must be done is not matched by a consensus on what needs to be done--and that presents some difficulties. My right hon. and learned Friend outlined his intentions in a very full statement a month or so before Christmas. Work is now proceeding on turning the three kinds of proposals to which my hon. Friend referred, with their varying effects, into legislative form. However, that is a time-consuming business. It involves a lot of consultation and discussion, and I cannot promise that I expect that Bill to be published in the near future.

Mr. Greville Janner (Leicester, West) : In view of the unanimous and critical report of the Select Committee on Employment on the proposed pit closures that was published today, cannot the House immediately debate that subject ? The Government would then have the opportunity to say that they made grievous mistakes, will follow the Committee's recommendations, will abandon

Column 507

the closure programme, at least in its present form, and will put an end to the agony of some 100,000 families who have been waiting for a decision for a very long time.

Mr. Newton : I understand the hon. and learned Gentleman's reasons for making that point, but the sensible course will be to discuss the report to which he has referred and others at a time when my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has himself been able to study them and to produce his suggested conclusions.

Mr. Eric Pickles (Brentwood and Ongar) : Will my right hon. Friend arrange for my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment to make a statement in the House next week on priorities in local government spending? Will he urge my right hon. and learned Friend to make it clear that the Government's priority is social care and not the provision of plush offices for Labour Members?

Mr. Newton : I believe that my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment will be the next to have an extremely lively time in the House when he answers questions next Wednesday.

Mr. Andrew Welsh (Angus, East) : Is the Leader of the House truly aware of the anger felt in agriculture over the abolition of the Potato Marketing Board and the effect of hill livestock compensatory allowance reductions on hill and upland farmers? Given the continuing confusion over the detail of common agricultural policy reform and of the GATT negotiations, will the right hon. Gentleman urgently institute a full debate on agriculture?

Mr. Newton : I note the hon. Gentleman's request, but I am obviously not in a position to make an immediate and positive response. I cannot add to what I said earlier about HLCAs. As for the Potato Marketing Board, as I am sure that the hon. Gentleman knows, the Government's objectives remain to ensure competition on equal terms for potato production and to ensure that the United Kingdom industry can both meet the needs of the domestic market and contribute to the export drive in agricultural produce.

Mr. Harry Greenway (Ealing, North) : Will my right hon. Friend arrange for a debate or statement early next week about the sickening and apparently growing practice of mutilating horses? It is causing widespread concern and distress. A statement is needed so that the House and the country can get to grips with a very sick and wicked practice.

Mr. Newton : I note my hon. Friend's concern for animal welfare-- which, indeed, is well known and long running, and is shared by most if not all hon. Members. I cannot promise either a statement or a debate, but my hon. Friend may wish to try to raise the matter in an Adjournment debate.

Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington) : Members' interests.

Mr. Newton : Let me add a little to what I told the hon. Gentleman last week, in case I inadvertently misled him. I have had some discussions with the Chairman of the Select Committee on Members' Interests, my hon. Friend the Member for Wealden (Sir G. Johnson Smith), and have

Next Section

Home Page