Mr. Winnick: Obviously we shall have to agree to disagree about that, but when I say that the bottom 10th of the population as regards income are 17 per cent. worse off in absolute terms than in 1979, is the right hon. Gentleman really telling me that he disputes that? That is an important figure, as are the other figures that I gave about people living in poverty; I notice that he has not commented on those.

Mr. Newton: The hon. Gentleman put great weight on what I regard as very over-simplified statistics, in an over-simplified presentation. I have given some pretty compelling reasons to support my belief that it was oversimplified. Obviously, we do not have time for an extended debate on the details of all the statistics, but I have made my point and I cleave to it.

The hon. Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody) was one of a number of hon. Members, including the hon. Member for Newport, West

18 Dec 1996 : Column 902

Mrs. Dunwoody: I am here.

Mr. Newton: She is a peripatetic hon. Lady, and has now appeared in what for her is a rather unusual part of the Chamber. Perhaps she is practising to be part of the gang that sits on the Opposition Bench below the Gangway. None the less, I am glad to see her in her place.

The hon. Lady, among others, made some remarks about parliamentary questions. I shall consider with great care what was said, including what the hon. Member for Newport, West said about the State Opening of Parliament. The hon. Lady has written to me recently about related matters, and I am considering those, but it may be appropriate if my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster replies, because he was in charge of the exercise that led to the publication of clearer guidelines on answering parliamentary questions. Of course, I always take the hon. Lady's comments seriously.

I accept that, as the hon. Lady said, there is a tendency for a flood of questions to be answered on the last day before a recess, but I think that the hon. Lady is being unduly cynical about the reasons that she attributed for that.

Part of the problem is caused by the huge increase in the volume of parliamentary questions asked, and by the pressure from hon. Members, who sometimes table questions at a late stage before a recess, not to mention the pressure within Departments to publish answers more quickly than they otherwise would. If questions are not answered today, they cannot be answered until 13 January, and if they were left until then, Departments would be criticised for that reason instead. I hope that the hon. Lady will at least acknowledge that point.

The main thrust of the hon. Lady's speech, which was added to by the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) and to some degree by the hon. Member for Perry Barr, concerned railway pensions. Hon. Members will have observed that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport not only heard her remarks but has come into the Chamber to hear mine, having had a word with me in the intervening period. I can therefore assure the hon. Lady that my right hon. Friend has taken note of what she said, although I hope that he will not mind my saying that some of his comments on it were less than flattering.

I must make it clear that the position regarding British Rail pensioners' rights will be no less favourable as a result of privatisation. The new arrangements replicate as far as possible those in place under BR, and include safeguards governing the use of surpluses. It is in the nature of a scheme funded jointly by employers and employees--60 per cent. is paid by the one and 40 per cent. by the other--that, when surpluses occur, they should be shared.

I went through a similar argument in a previous capacity when I was the Minister responsible for occupational pensions. In general terms, the topic has

18 Dec 1996 : Column 903

Mrs. Dunwoody: I understand what the right hon. Gentleman is saying, but the Government have written in so many exemptions for the private companies that there is no doubt that they would expect other people to support any deficit that appeared. My point is simpler than that: they are taking money to which they are not entitled, and they will make darn sure that they do not pay for any deficits.

Mr. Newton: As my time is now diminishing by the minute, I cannot say more to the hon. Lady than that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has listened to what she has said--although I must admit that I could hear him uttering dissenting noises from a sedentary position. I am sure that he will come back to her on the subject if he feels it appropriate.

The hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler) continued what I acknowledge has been a long and vigorously fought campaign on matters related to BSE. He, probably more than almost anyone else, will be aware that the House had an extensive opportunity, if not to debate the matter, at least to question the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food about BSE-related matters after his statement on Monday. Clearly I cannot go over all the ground again in a short speech.

I managed to follow the hon. Gentleman's speech from afar, although I was not in the Chamber at the time, and it struck me as, to put it mildly, somewhat tendentious. Much of what he said was based on 20:20 hindsight. Whatever the genesis of the 30-months scheme may have been, it was undoubtedly supported by the National Farmers Union, partly because farmers recognised that they would not sell any beef from animals older than 30 months unless something along those lines was done.

The hon. Gentleman might have acknowledged the fact that the result of the scheme was an increase in consumer confidence in the British market substantially more rapid than occurred in many other countries in Europe, and that that brought advantage to the British industry.

Mr. Tyler: Can the right hon. Gentleman give one assurance to the House--that, if the Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office wished to go through the books and see exactly what happened, the Government would co-operate fully?

Mr. Newton: Of course the Government will always co-operate with properly constituted bodies of that kind. Beyond that, these are not matters on which I can comment off the cuff on the Floor of the House this morning. None the less, I shall ensure that the hon. Gentleman's remarks are drawn to the attention of the appropriate Ministers.

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has been criticised in some respects--in my view, unfairly. In relation to the BSE culling arrangements, he is in the same position as I am on a range of other matters--that of chairing a Cabinet Committee or a co-ordinating group of Ministers.

18 Dec 1996 : Column 904

I am coming to the end of the time allowed, and I should comment briefly on what was said by the hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox), without whom no debate of this nature would be complete these days. He made a traditional "Tooting speech", starting with hospitals and ending with Cyprus. I noted carefully what he said, and shall ensure that it is drawn to the attention of the appropriate Ministers.

I cannot comment on everything said by the hon. Member for Linlithgow, who made a characteristic speech--I mean that as a compliment, not as some sort of disguised insult. The latest information that I have on the incident in Lima, which is not as complete as I would like, is that it is possible that some British nationals are in the residence. I cannot say more at this stage. The United Kingdom is in close touch with the Peruvian authorities, and we understand that negotiations are under way. We shall of course pass on any further information at the earliest opportunity, as it emerges.

I do not think that the hon. Member for North-East Derbyshire (Mr. Barnes) would expect me to comment in detail on the points that he made in an excellent constituency speech. I shall ensure that they are drawn to the attention of those of my hon. Friends who are concerned with such matters in detail, just as I shall draw the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health to what was said by the hon. Member for Sherwood (Mr. Tipping).

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Belfast, South (Rev. Martin Smyth) for the words of thanks that he expressed for the action that we took to enable the Protection from Harassment Bill to extend to Northern Ireland. I take note of the fact that he took the trouble to acknowledge that; we were glad to be able to meet him in that respect.

My hon. Friend the Member for Gravesham (Mr. Arnold) told me that he wanted me to take note of what he said rather than to comment extensively on it. As he also told me that he would not be able to be here for my winding-up speech, I shall make little further comment, other than to say that I have several points that I think he would find encouraging, and I shall try to communicate them to him in other ways.

Those points include the fact that a public inquiry into the statutory orders needed for the Northfleet bypass scheme will be held before mid-April 1997. I understand that there has been much frustration among the scheme's supporters about delays in progress on that important matter. However, as my hon. Friend acknowledged, those delays have not been of the Government's making.

Because of the slightly unexpected additional time that I had, I have been able to comment on almost every speech. I hope that my comments will enable hon. Members to depart at least slightly happier than when they arrived and that they all, including you, Madam Deputy Speaker, will have the sort of relaxed and enjoyable Christmas that I am sure they all--or at least some of them--deserve.

18 Dec 1996 : Column 905