| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): May a Scot, who was involved with Professor John Cash in a previous incarnation, commend the Secretary of State for his good judgment in appointing him? I also commend my right hon. Friend for appointing Mike Fogden. As Dick Crossman's parliamentary private secretary, I can say that he is one of the few civil servants to have escaped unscathed and with flying colours in the Crossman diaries.
I have two substantive questions. First, is there not a general problem of a shortage of laboratory scientific technicians and officers? Is that not a national problem? Secondly, the Secretary of State said:
Mr. Dobson:
That is Professor Cash's wording, not mine. He had interviews with all sorts of people involved, he looked at a great deal of the written material, and he came to that conclusion. As my hon. Friend has pointed out from his vast depth of knowledge, Professor Cash is a person of immense distinction. He did a brilliant job running the Scottish blood transfusion service, and has just ceased holding the eminent position of president of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh--a title for which most people in this Chamber would be willing to give their right or left arm--
Mr. Dobson:
Oh, certainly. I would find that an immense distinction.
I am willing to accept Professor Cash's judgment in these matters. As for Mike Fogden, it is certainly true that anybody who comes totally unscathed out of the Crossman diaries is clearly a person of greater merit than I had thought before.
It has never been brought to my attention that there is a general shortage of scientific laboratory staff in the national health service. However, it is crucial that we continually and continuously recognise their immense contribution to a top-quality, science-based health service. Those people have been badgered about and messed around, and their lives have been changed because of
management fashion. That is what makes people leave the service, and deters good people from joining it. That is why we have to make these changes.
Mr. Ben Chapman (Wirral, South):
I join my colleagues in welcoming my right hon. Friend's statement. However, the steps taken in relation to the blood transfusion service in Liverpool now seem to have been wholly mistaken, on the basis of misinformation, incompetence and poor management. I believe that, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said, it was right that at least the chairman was dismissed. As he also said, it is right that others should consider their position.
These are not easy times for Merseyside, and they have not been for a long while. As we are trying to improve our image and fighting to retain jobs and services, we could do without negative decisions, especially when they are wholly unnecessary. I hope that my right hon. Friend will again join me in condemning the decision and its effect--albeit temporary, as I hope that all the services will be restored to Liverpool.
Mr. Dobson:
When my hon. Friend has the opportunity to read Professor Cash's report, he will see that it mentions the need to consider the impact on the great city of Liverpool, and on Merseyside generally, of the transfer of any national body. The city has been run down, discarded and cast aside for far too long, and we must start reversing that process--I hope that what I have announced will be a minor contribution to that. As to people considering their position, I asked Sir Colin Walker to consider his--I think that he considered it safe, but he was wrong.
Madam Speaker:
I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the Queen has signified Her Royal Assent to the following Acts:
Employment Rights (Dispute Resolution) Act 1998
Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1998
Criminal Procedure (Intermediate Diets) (Scotland) Act 1998
Mr. Fraser Kemp (Houghton and Washington, East):
I beg to move,
For their first 700 years, the gospels remained happily and peaceably in the north-east of England. In the 1530s, Henry VIII's commissioners decided to take them from Durham, largely because of the value of the gold around them. I am glad that that aspect of Britain's turbulent past has gone. I doubt that the Crime and Disorder Bill, which the House will consider shortly, will deal retrospectively with the theft of the gospels from the north-east 500 years ago, much as I would like it to. We are prepared to forgive and forget, however--hence this Bill.
In the past 100 years, there have been many campaigns in the north-east for the return of the gospels. I pay tribute to the Lindisfarne gospels campaign and Richard Burg-Rust, who organised a rally in London on the day after St. Cuthbert's day this year--I had the pleasure of speaking to the rally at the British library--and a petition of 5,000 north-easterners that was presented to No. 10.
I also mention the campaign led by Councillor John McCormack and the North of England Assembly of Local Authorities, which has managed to secure agreement in principle for the temporary return of the Lindisfarne gospels to the north-east for the millennium, with a digital version to which people, scholars and students alike, will have access--they will be able to study these great works of Christian literature. Last but not least, I also pay tribute to the Bishop of Durham, who led a debate in another place last Thursday--he, too, has been a strong supporter. I commend the efforts of all those people.
I believe that the Government have made serious and strong attempts in the past 10 months to recognise the crucial role that the regions will play in the nation's future. They have rightly done so on economic grounds, but I do not think that it would be incompatible to do so on the grounds of culture and identity.
I believe that the Bill would ensure that the culture and identity of the northern region of England would flourish as a result of the return of the gospels, which are a potent symbol of the north-east. It is a north-east which is equally proud of its history and confident about its future. The return of the gospels would send a message from the House that the United Kingdom is a nation of different regions. One of its great strengths is its diversity. People would recognise that if the Bill were presented today.
I realise that some hon. Members will argue against the return of the gospels. I fundamentally disagree with that argument. I respect the view of those who advance the argument, but I disagree with it.
There are many examples of national collections. The Tate gallery and the Victoria and Albert museum both have sites in parts of Britain other than London, at which
national treasures can be displayed. I do not believe that the relocation of national treasure in any way diminishes the significance of the object or objects. That happens only if we define the nation as existing only withinthe M25.
Before anyone shouts about the Elgin marbles--they are often referred to when I raise the case of the gospels--I would point out that, contrary to popular belief, the north-east is an integral part of the United Kingdom, not a foreign land. There are fundamental differences between the marbles and the gospels.
I believe also that where we locate and how we display national treasures are important considerations. It is important that our treasures can be seen properly and enjoyed by millions of people. Currently, the gospels are located in a room somewhere between King's Cross and St. Pancras stations. I do not think that that location does them the justice they deserve.
The Bill deliberately does not specify a location. However, it has been suggested to me that there are many locations in the north-east where they could be displayed in a much better setting. I am sure that the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) will agree when I refer to the mystical magic of Lindisfarne and Holy Island, where I spend my holidays. It would be a tremendous setting for the gospels.
There is also the peninsula, as it were, of the River Wear, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for City of Durham (Mr. Steinberg). It is a world heritage site. Within that peninsula is a dramatic and impressive castle, and a cathedral where the bones of St. Cuthbert lie. I think that few in the House would argue that a room in north London, an area not renowned for its panoramic views, could be in any way a better setting for the gospels than the two places I have described. There are many more suitable sites. A return of the gospels would give a tremendous boost to the identity of the north-east, and to its economy through tourism.
The Bill also provides for necessary safeguards. I am extremely conscious that the gospels are great treasures of the nation. I am sure that no Member of this place would want to see anything happen to them that potentially could damage them. Access for the experts, housing and upkeep must be properly provided. If those things cannot be done properly, I would not want to see the gospels leave their current position. However, I am confident that the north-east could provide the safeguards we require.
"the chairman of the board had often, perhaps perforce"--
I am not sure what that means--
"been too close to the day-to-day operational aspects of the NBS and on occasions appeared to have been either misinformed or misunderstood the briefing he received."
Can my right hon. Friend expand on that? It is a mind-boggling statement. I hope that the Secretary of State is right, and the solicitors are wrong.
4.16 pm
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for the transfer of the Lindisfarne Gospels from the British Museum to a location in the North East Region of England.
I shall first give a brief history of the Lindisfarne gospels. They were written and illuminated at the end of the seventh century--some 1,300 years ago--by monks who had come from Ireland to establish Christianity in Britain. They were produced in commemoration of a famous saint, St. Cuthbert, in honour of God. They remain one of the greatest literary and religious masterpieces in the world.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |