|
Column Number: 397
Standing Committee G
Thursday 23 January 2003
(Afternoon)
[Mr. Peter Pike in the Chair]
2.30 pm
Mr. David Wilshire (Spelthorne): On a point of order, Mr. Pike. I have a copy of the list of Committee members here. Can you confirm whether it is up to date? I have heard a rumour that one of the 16 members has been taken off it, or has asked to be. Do you have any knowledge of that?
The Chairman: The Chair is not aware of any change in the membership of the Committee.
Mr. Wilshire: Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. I am grateful for your reply, but you will have noticed, if you have looked at Hansard for our proceedings thus far, that the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) has not actually been here. I suppose that that is reasonable in one way, as we have reached discussion of Wales only this afternoon. I exempt the Under-Secretary of State for Wales from attending when he has other ministerial duties to perform, but we Back Benchers ought to be here and I had assumed that the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy would appear this afternoon. However, I am told that you may have had a message saying that he is not going to bother to come, Mr. Pike. Perhaps you can confirm that.
Not only is the hon. Gentleman not bothering to come, but no one else from Plaid Cymru can be bothered to come either. They are far too busy worrying about party politics and electioneering. Is it or is it not an abuse of the House for someone to be given a place on a Committee but not to bother to use it?
The Chairman: Order. The hon. Gentleman has made his point. He knows that it is not a matter for the Chair. Only one Member from Plaid Cymru is on the Committee. He is not here and I recognise that the business for this afternoon concerns Wales, but that is not a matter for the Chair.
Mr. Wilshire: Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. I can accept that, but is there any mechanism whereby the Government or the official Opposition can make use of a Committee place in such a debate if someone else cannot be bothered to take it? I would rather see the Labour party have that place than see it stay empty. We are prepared to have the debate and produce people who care about Wales, even if Plaid Cymru is not.
The Chairman: Order. The hon. Gentleman knows that appointments to the Committee are not a matter for the Chair. They are made on a basis agreed by the House. The Committee of Selection made that appointment and I have no power to change the distribution of places. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman has made his point and that people can use it, but it is not for me to comment on.
Column Number: 398
Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold): Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. I spoke in person to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy, who informed me that the Government had not consulted him about putting him on the Committee. When he found he was on it, he asked to be relieved of his duties, but he is still on it. In the rather unusual circumstances in which someone is clearly unable to serve on a Committee, is there any mechanism for the Opposition to substitute someone else?
The Chairman: I cannot comment on that. I am not a member of the usual channels or the Committee of Selection.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr. Tony McNulty): Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. Purely for the sake of clarity and accuracy, I should point out that the Government do not appoint minority party Members to Committees except at the behest of their Whip. That Whip is the Member from the Scottish National party, that fellow who used to sing for Runrig—I cannot remember his constituency. The name of the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy was duly put forward through Government channels to the Committee of Selection by that Whip, not by the Government.
The Chairman: That really must be the last point of order. I am mindful that we have much business on which to make progress, so I cannot allow any more time on that matter. Clause 54
Wales Spatial Plan
Mr. Clifton-Brown: I beg to move amendment No. 406, in
We now come to part 6 of the Bill. First, may I welcome the Under-Secretary of State for Wales? As my hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) quite rightly said, we fully understand that he has not been able to be present for the full duration of our consideration of the Bill. It would be unreasonable to expect that, but we welcome him here to look after the interests of the Welsh. We shall have an interesting debate this afternoon because, in many ways, we like the system proposed for Wales better than that proposed for England. It is simpler and it delivers more closely to the ground, with greater clarity.
However, we have tabled several amendments and new clauses to probe the Government's thinking on the inconsistency between the systems that they are introducing for England and Wales. After all, if one studies the population of this country—the Government's document ''Your Region, Your Choice'' has been very informative in giving me population figures—one finds that London contains 7.3 million people. The south-east contains 8.077 million people, 13 per cent. of the United Kingdom's population. The south-west contains 4.9 million, the
Column Number: 399
east midlands 4.1 million, the west midlands 5.3 million, the east of England 5.4 million, the north-west 6.8 million and Yorkshire 5.04 million. The only area where the figure is at all comparable to Wales is the north-east, which has 2.581 million people. The latest figure for Wales, unless the Minister can produce a more up-to-date one, shows a population of 2.946 million. That was the accurate figure for 2000.
2.36 pm
Sitting suspended for a Division in the House.
2.51 pm
On resuming—
Sir Sydney Chapman (Chipping Barnet): On a point of order, Mr. Pike. You will know that Madame Guillotine's lethal instrument descends on the Committee at 5 o'clock. That effectively means that the 20 clauses, 16 new clauses and schedules relating to part 6 must be considered in the unseemly time of two and a half hours, which has now been shortened and, for all I know, may be disrupted further with other votes on the Floor of the House.
Are we bound by the 5 o'clock guillotine? Do you have the discretion to lengthen the sitting slightly, Mr. Pike? If not, for future Bills would you discuss with the appropriate channels the suggestion that instead of the guillotine falling at the end of a particular sitting, which may be curtailed, it should fall at the beginning of the following sitting? I genuinely believe that that would be an improvement to the procedures.
The Chairman: The hon. Gentleman will recognise that his point is a difficult one for the Chair. I am bound by the decision that was taken on the Floor of the House and in the programme motion that was agreed by the Committee. I have no powers of flexibility.
In the past, there were two different methods for moving guillotine motions in the House: one gave a finishing time and the other gave a number of hours from the start of the debate. I am bound by the 5 o'clock guillotine and have no power to waive that. I suggest that when views are sought on programming, as they will be at some time during the next 12 months, hon. Members may wish to convey their view. I have no doubt that the issue will be raised when the Chairmen's Panel meets, but I cannot comment for or against the hon. Gentleman's proposition.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. Don Touhig): Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. The Government wish to make it clear that the usual channels are always open for discussion. I believe that discussions have already taken place between Government and Opposition Whips, so the opportunity exists for further discussions.
The Chairman: On that point, I clearly stated my position when I first took the Chair that if there was an indication to me that there could be some change, I would be prepared to allow it. Again, I stress that I can take a motion to adjourn for a meeting of the Programming Sub-Committee only if the usual
Column Number: 400
channels indicate to me that there is a proposition that would find favour with the Committee.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: Further to that point of order, Mr. Pike. We are all feeling our way under the procedures, which apply whether or not we like them. My hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Sir Sydney Chapman) made a good point on procedure, because the guillotines seem to follow the same pattern. His proposal would allow much more flexibility to be built into the timetables, particularly as the decision on when to adjourn the Committee belongs to the Government, anyway.
I understand your ruling on this occasion, Mr. Pike. I am simply raising a further point of order to ask you to convey the points that have been made to Mr. Speaker and to the Procedure Committee. The usual channels will have heard what has been said. I hope that we can build in a little more flexibility in the future.
The Chairman: Mr. Speaker, too, must work within the decisions made by the House. The points have been made and I shall ensure that they are understood in the appropriate places. I cannot predict the outcome, but I suggest that the Committee wastes no more time because time is tight. Perhaps you would now resume, Mr. Clifton-Brown.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: Indeed, Mr. Pike. Thank you for your helpful rulings.
Before we broke for the Division in the House, I was speaking to amendment No. 406. The purpose of the amendment is to tease out from the Minister the Government's reason for having different systems in Wales and England. In essence, the system in Wales is far simpler than that in England in that the Welsh Assembly seems to have complete control over what goes into the spatial plan for Wales and then ensures that it is considered by local authorities when they draw up their local development plan. There are no subdivisions of the local development plan, such as local development schemes, documents or frameworks, as there are in England. It is a much simpler and clearer scheme.
| 
