| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Deregulation
7. Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what plans he has to increase the representation of small businesses on the deregulation task force.[1304]
Mr. Willetts: Five of the 12 members either run small to medium-sized businesses or are involved in small business in other ways.
Mr. Cunningham: By affording small business men so little representation on the task force, does the Minister not confirm that the Labour party, and not the Government, is the friend of small business?
Mr. Willetts: The latest set of appointments to the deregulation task force reveals that the representation of people from small and medium-sized businesses is very good. Our deregulation policy is aimed specifically at helping small businesses. I refer to measures such as the enforcers green card, the Prime Minister's involvement in the "Your Business Matters" conferences and our wider measures designed to ease the burden of accountancy obligations on small businesses.
11 Nov 1996 : Column 9
Mr. John Marshall: Would my hon. Friend care to ask the deregulation task force whether it wants wages to be regulated by a Labour Government through a national minimum wage or our social policy to be regulated from Brussels? If that were to happen, the deregulation task force could be wound up.
Mr. Willetts: My hon. Friend has put his finger on the key point. The idea that the Labour party can masquerade as the friend of small business when it is committed to the minimum wage and to signing the social chapter is absolutely absurd.
Government Openness
8. Mr. Tony Banks: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what actions he is taking to promote greater openness in central Government.[1305]
Mr. Freeman: I announced to the House last week by way of written answer that the Government's code of practice on access to Government information will continue to have a central role in setting the clear, recognised standard for providing information both to Parliament and to the public.
Mr. Foulkes: Did my hon. Friend understand that?
Mr. Banks: No, I did not. Two words spring to mind in response to that answer: the first is "bull".
If the Minister is really interested in open government, I have a perfect example of where he could start. There are no fewer than 12 unexploded bombs in my constituency and my constituents would like to know where they are located. Will the Government release that information? It is most unpleasant to think that one may be living on top of an unexploded bomb. As I live in my constituency, there could be one under my house--I would regret that deeply--so there is a certain amount of self-interest involved in my question. Will the Government release that information so that my constituents may know the facts and those unexploded bombs may be dealt with?
Mr. Freeman:
The hon. Gentleman perhaps has a phobia about not only unexploded bombs but Government plans involving his house. I know that he blames the Deputy Prime Minister personally for the route of the channel tunnel rail link, which I believe passes directly under the hon. Gentleman's bedroom. I am afraid that there is no prospect of changing the route.
The hon. Gentleman's question about unexploded bombs is perfectly serious. The information that he requires is at the Public Record Office. During wartime, it obviously was not possible to trace exactly where all unexploded ordnance landed in London, but I shall convey the hon. Gentleman's concerns to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence and see whether the hon. Gentleman can receive a comprehensive reply.
11 Nov 1996 : Column 10
9. Mr. Simon Hughes:
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what responsibility he has for the co-ordination and presentation of Government policy on standards in public life.[1307]
Mr. Freeman:
My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister has general responsibility for the workings of the Government and the presentation of their policies. That includes their policies on standards in public life.
Mr. Hughes:
That is a helpful answer. Do the Deputy Prime Minister and his colleagues accept that one of the best guarantees of the highest standards in public life is the independence of the civil service, whoever are the Government of the day? Does the Chancellor of the Duchy accept that, in that context, it would be a good policy to entrench the rights of civil servants in law? Does he agree that there must be a proper procedure whereby civil servants who think that they are improperly requested to act by Ministers can go public when they believe that it is in the public interest to do so?
Mr. Freeman:
I confirm on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, who is technically the Minister for the Civil Service, my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister and all members of the Government that it is extremely important that our civil service--the best in the world--should not only be independent of any political party, but be seen to be, and provide fearlessly objective advice to Ministers. I firmly believe that, as do all Ministers.
On 1 January, we published a code of practice for civil servants, which I believe has the force of law. It provides a complaints mechanism for civil servants right up to the civil service commissioners, at which stage matters can be made public. That mechanism is available to civil servants if they have concerns. Surely it is better to make concerns and complaints known in that way than to speak to a public newspaper without the facts being properly described.
The Government have an open mind on legislation. At the appropriate time, whether it be in debate or during private conversations, I am happy to carry forward any concerns that the code may not be as effective as some hon. Members believe, and about whether it would be right to incorporate those concerns in legislation. It is--[Hon. Members: "Come on."] I am making a formal offer and repeating what I have said twice before on legislation to protect the civil service.
Sir Patrick Cormack:
Does my right hon. Friend agree that one development that has slightly tarnished the wonderful reputation of our civil service in recent years is the proliferation of leaks?
Mr. Freeman:
The process of good government--I am sure, in all seriousness, that the occupants of the Opposition Front Bench will agree with this--is not served by leaks by anyone, whether he or she is in the civil service, in the public service or anywhere else.
11 Nov 1996 : Column 11
10. Mr. MacShane:
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list the occasions on which he has met Mr. Ian Greer to discuss the presentation of Government policy.[1308]
The Deputy Prime Minister:
None.
Mr. MacShane:
Is the Deputy Prime Minister aware that, given the flippant way in which he has handled previous questions on the important issue of sleaze this afternoon, few people listening to our proceedings will find it hard to believe that he is not alone among Ministers who met Ian Greer in recent years to discuss funding for the Conservative party and other issues? Can the right hon. Gentleman help us out by taking up the offer that he made on Radio 4 this morning, when he said that there was no evidence available, by publishing his political office diaries and the notes of all his meetings over the past five years?
The Deputy Prime Minister:
That is a classic of the technique of the Labour party. I was asked a straight question and I have given the clearest possible answer. I have not met Ian Greer in the circumstances that have been put to me. To go further, I cannot remember meeting Ian Greer for several years. I am not going to say that I have never met him in my life, because I think that I have. However, the idea that I have had any sort of negotiations or dealings with Ian Greer ex officio is absurd. I have given the clearest possible explanation to the House.
I find it deplorable that, when a Minister gives such an assurance, it is immediately suggested that he should publish his diary. I find also--[Interruption.] In a democracy, there must be the basic assumption that, if Ministers give assurances at the Dispatch Box, they do so with integrity.
I take the House back only a few minutes when the same point was peddled by the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott). If it were possible for special favours to be handed out to those who support the Tory party, that could be done only by civil servants. Ministers do not have the power to indicate preference over contracts. It is only civil servants who could have done that. Therefore, for the Labour party, through its spokesman, to go on and on suggesting that the practice is current is grossly to understate the civil service.
To make an identical point, if that were possible in central Government, it would be possible in local government, where Labour governs a large number of authorities, and it would be as preposterous for me to suggest that it is happening in local government as it is for the Labour party to suggest that it is happening in central Government.
Mr. Jacques Arnold:
Is it not likely that the person who had very close discussions with Mr. Ian Greer about Government policy was also likely to be a member of the board of Mr. Greer's company--a person who apparently moonlighted as a Front-Bench spokesman for the Labour party in the House of Lords until it sacked her for apparently doing no wrong?
The Deputy Prime Minister:
I am sure that the Labour party will wish to weigh very carefully whether it wants
11 Nov 1996 : Column 12
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |