§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton)With permission, I would like to make a statement about the business for next week. MONDAY 17 JUNE—Remaining stages of the Family Law Bill [Lords].
TUESDAY 18 JUNE—Opposition Day [15th Allotted Day]. Until about 7 o'clock, there will be a debate on the fight against fraud in the benefit system. Followed by a debate on the privatisation of the nuclear industry. Both debates will arise on Opposition motions.
WEDNESDAY 19 JUNE—Until 2 o'clock, there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Until about 7 o'clock there will be a debate on sentencing policy on a Government motion.
Motion on the Northern Ireland Act 1974 (Interim Period Extension) Order.
THURSDAY 20 JUNE—Debate on the European Union on a motion for the Adjournment of the House. Details of the relevant documents will be given in the Official Report.
FRIDAY 21 JUNE—Debate on the strategy against drugs on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
The provisional business for the following week will be as follows:
MONDAY 24 JUNE—Remaining stages of the Defamation Bill [Lords]. The Chairman of Ways and Means is expected to name opposed private business for consideration at 7 o'clock.
TUESDAY 25 JUNE—Opposition Day [16th Allotted Day].
There will be a debate on a motion in the name of the Liberal Democrats. Subject to be announced.
WEDNESDAY 26 JUNE—In the morning, until 12.30 pm, there will be a debate on the second report from the Employment Committee on the right to work/workfare followed by a debate on the sixth report from the Treasury Committee on the private finance initiative. Those debates on Select Committee reports will be followed by debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
In the afternoon, the 17th Opposition Day, there will be a debate on an Opposition motion, the subject of which is to be announced.
THURSDAY 27 JUNE—Until 7 o'clock, motions on the structural and boundary change orders; that is, local government reorganisation. Details will be given in the Official Report.
FRIDAY 28 JUNE—The House will not be sitting.
The House will also wish to know that on Wednesday 19 June, there will be a debate on the administration and control of CAP compensatory aid in European Standing Committee A, and that on Wednesday 26 June there will be a debate on small and medium enterprises in European Standing Committee B. Details of the relevant documents will be given in the Official Report.
§ [Wednesday 19 June:
§ European Standing Committee A—Relevant European Community document: 7181/96 relating to CAP compensatory aid: administration and control. Relevant European Legislation Committee Reports: HC 51-xxii (1995–96) and HC 51-xx (1995–96).
439§ Wednesday 26 June:
§ European Standing Committee B—Relevant European Community documents: (a) 6141/96 relating to small and medium sized enterprises; (b) 6929/96 relating to loans to small and medium sized enterprises. Relevant European Legislation Committee Reports: (a) HC 51-xix (1995–96) and (b) HC 51-xxii (1995–96).
§ Thursday 20 June:
§ Debate on the European Union on a motion for the Adjournment of the House. The following documents are relevant:
§ The White Paper on Developments in the European Union July to December 1995 (Cm 3250); First Annual Report on Progress in Implementing the Action Plan for the Introduction of Advanced Television Services in Europe 8567/95; The Commission's Recommendation for the Broad Guidelines of the Economic Policies of the Member States and the Community (11/207/96-EN REV 1); The Minutes of Evidence taken by the Foreign Affairs Committee on 12 June (House of Commons Paper No. 306 ii).
§ Thursday 27 June:
§ Motions on the structural and boundary change orders. The relevant orders are as follows:
§ The Cambridgeshire (City of Peterborough) (Structural, Boundary and Electoral Changes) Order 1996; the Lancashire (Boroughs of Blackburn and Blackpool) (Structural Change) Order 1996; the Nottinghamshire (City of Nottingham) (Structural Change) Order 1996; the Cheshire (Boroughs of Halton and Warrington) (Structural Change) Order 1996; the Devon (City of Plymouth and Borough of Torbay) (Structural Change) Order 1996; the Essex (Boroughs of Colchester, Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock and District of Tendring) (Structural, Boundary and Electoral Changes) Order 1996; the Hereford and Worcester (Structural, Boundary and Electoral Changes) Order 1996; the Kent (Borough of Gillingham and City of Rochester upon Medway) (Structural Change) Order 1996; the Shropshire (District of the Wrekin) (Structural Change) Order 1996.]
§ Finally, I am glad to say that I am now in a position—the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) will say "at last"—to answer a question that the hon. Lady has asked me on a number of occasions by telling her that the summer economic debate, as it is known—the debate on the economy—will take place on Wednesday 17 July.
§ I am also in a position to tell the hon. Lady something that I do not think that she has yet asked about, but no doubt soon would, which is the date of the Budget. My right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer intends to introduce his Budget statement on Tuesday 26 November.
§ Mrs. Ann Taylor (Dewsbury)I thank the Leader of the House for that information. As he has said, on several occasions recently I have asked him about various matters, including the date of the summer economic debate, and I am grateful that he has been able to give us some notice of when that debate will take place. Will the right hon. Gentleman also confirm that the summer economic forecast will be available on 9 July, which I understand is the provisional date for publication?
440 The right hon. Gentleman has been sympathetic recently to a request that I made for a debate on the situation in Hong Kong. He said from the Dispatch Box that he saw good reason for having another debate in the near future and I wonder if he can now tell us whether it is likely that that debate will take place before the summer recess.
The right hon. Gentleman has also expressed sympathy throughout the parliamentary year to my request for a debate on further reform of parliamentary procedures. In view of his general sympathy to discussing such matters, is there any realistic chance of such a debate before the summer recess?
The right hon. Gentleman has not announced a date for the next meeting of the Welsh Grand Committee. He will be aware that my hon. Friends from Wales have made repeated requests for a meeting of the Welsh Grand Committee so that they can have a full-scale debate on the BSE crisis and its impact in Wales. Does he accept that the need for such a debate in that setting is now extremely urgent and will he take steps to try to ensure that that can happen as soon as possible?
On an entirely different issue, the right hon. Gentleman may have read about the distressing experience of passengers booked on a flight from Orlando to Manchester at the weekend. As the passengers on that flight, including a family from my constituency, had genuine reason to be concerned, and as they believe that their consumer rights were inadequate and that they were given less than helpful advice by the British consulate in Orlando, will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that there is ministerial co-operation to investigate the incident and that, following such an investigation, Ministers report to the House on any changes that might be necessary to deal with such a situation in the future?
Finally, one date that the right hon. Gentleman did not mention but about which there has been a great deal of speculation, is the date of the summer recess. Can the Leader of the House throw any light on that particular matter, even if it is only to remind the House of the dates of the royal garden parties so that we can make some informed judgment as to how far into July the House is likely to be sitting?
§ Mr. NewtonMay I first express my gratitude to the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) for her words of thanks about the date of the summer economic debate, and in return respond by saying that it is my understanding that the summer economic forecast is expected to be published on Tuesday 9 July? One reason for having the debate on 17 July is to allow a little time for study after its publication but also to allow time for the Treasury Select Committee to take evidence from Treasury officials and, indeed, the Chancellor before the debate takes place. I hope that what I have announced will be for the general convenience of everybody concerned.
I remain sympathetic to the hon. Lady's request for debates on Hong Kong and procedure, but I am not in a position to translate sympathy into an announcement at the moment. There is quite a lot of pressure of business between now and the summer recess, but I shall do my best.
On the hon. Lady's question about the Welsh Grand Committee and the debate that her hon. Friends wish to have on bovine spongiform encephalopathy, I am aware 441 that there has been discussion and correspondence between my right hon. Friend and her hon. Friend about the overall organisation of this particular meeting of the Welsh Grand Committee. It is more appropriate for me to leave the discussion to continue between the usual channels than to intervene on the Floor of the House, but I take note of her remarks.
I admire the ingenious way in which the hon. Lady managed to weave a constituency case into business questions, for perfectly good and understandable reasons that I respect. She will understand that I am not in a position to comment in detail, but I shall certainly ensure that her remarks and request are brought to the attention of my appropriate right hon. Friends.
Lastly—to be honest I cannot remember the dates of all the royal garden parties—the hon. Lady asked about the date of the summer recess, in which I suspect that there is widespread interest. I have already announced some business for 17 July, and it is only fair that I should tell the House that, although I am not yet in a position to give dates for the recess, I anticipate that the House is likely to sit well into the second half of July.
§ Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire)May I ask my right hon. Friend to reconsider the time that he has allotted for the Defamation Bill? Does he accept that the clause on the bill of rights—if I may put it that way—is probably the most important parliamentary matter that we will have had to discuss this Parliament and arguably for many years? Does he seriously think that a debate that terminates at 7 o'clock with opposed private business is enough? I know that the debate can resume later, but would it not be better to have an uninterrupted day on that particular subject?
§ Mr. NewtonI note my hon. Friend's thoughts. He will have heard it said from a sedentary position—albeit not by me—that it is possible for debate to be interrupted rather than terminated by private business, and there are many examples of such a resumption. Indeed, if I remember rightly, I think that it happened when we last debated the Defamation Bill. I note my hon. Friend's points. Much of the Bill appears to be pretty non-controversial, so there should be quite a significant opportunity for debate on the point about which he is concerned.
§ Mr. Archy Kirkwood (Roxburgh and Berwickshire)May I support the question that was asked by the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) about the need for a debate on procedural reform? The official Opposition have come up with some fairly new and interesting ideas, and the Liberal Democrats are in the process of doing the same.
May I say in passing that it is useful that the House has been given details of two weeks' business, because it allows me an opportunity to say that I am slightly concerned that up to nine orders will have to be considered in a three-hour debate on Thursday 27 June. Perhaps other parties were consulted through the usual channels about this, but I am nervous about the number of structural and boundary orders that will have to be considered during that debate.
§ Mr. NewtonI note the hon. Gentleman's support for what the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) said 442 about a debate on procedures, but I cannot add to what I said to her. As for the business for Thursday 27 June, the hon. Gentleman is right in thinking that my proposal seemed to be for the general convenience of the House in the light of discussion between the usual channels; but, as in a sense he is also a "usual channel", I will take that as a representation, and will at least give it what consideration I can.
§ Mr. John Sykes (Scarborough)May we have a debate about the future of the Crown Prosecution Service at some stage? I ask because yesterday a 16-year-old thug appeared in Scarborough magistrates court charged with vicious assault on a 40-year-old gentleman. It was all caught on camera, but when the youth pleaded not guilty the CPS dropped the charges immediately, without consulting the police as it is bound to do. Is it not high time that we sent the CPS packing and handed responsibility for prosecutions back to the police, where it belongs?
§ Mr. NewtonMy hon. Friend would not expect me to comment on such a case off the cuff. As he will understand, I feel that the appropriate course is for me to bring his remarks to the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General, who has responsibility for the CPS.
§ Mrs. Alice Mahon (Halifax)Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on the closure of hospitals and accident and emergency departments? He will know that, along with my constituents, I have been fighting the closure of Northowram hospital. My constituents and I are dismayed that the Edgware accident and emergency department is apparently to be kept open in some form because of blackmailing by two local Members of Parliament.
While he is at it, could the right hon. Gentleman please give us the Government's definitions of an accident and emergency department and a casualty department?
§ Mr. NewtonI am not in a position to add to what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said not so long ago when he made it clear that he did not accept the line of argument to which the hon. Lady has returned.
Clearly, the difference between a full-scale accident and emergency department and a casualty service of the kind that exists at one hospital in my constituency is largely one of scale. The degree to which all kinds of modern equipment are available is another factor.
§ Mr. Barry Field (Isle of Wight)When may we have a debate on the competitiveness White Paper that was announced today? I am sure that my right hon. Friend will be surprised to learn that, when the Deputy Prime Minister was President of the Board of Trade, he was instrumental in securing regional assistance and a business link for the Isle of Wight—as well as the regional office, which has been very helpful under Gillian Ashworth. Despite all that assistance, we have the lowest percentage of higher-rate taxpayers in the country, and we still have one of the highest levels of seasonal unemployment. We hear all the grizzling and grumps from Opposition Members, but their economies have been transformed with the Government's assistance. I hope that my right 443 hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister will be able to bring his entrepreneurial skills to bear on the island's economy, and crack the problems.
§ Mr. NewtonI thank my hon. Friend for acknowledging the importance of the policies that the Government have been pursuing, whose further development was set out by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister this afternoon. My hon. Friend will realise that his request for a debate is the third that I have received so far this afternoon, against a background of some anxiety about the date of the summer recess. He will appreciate that I may be trying to put a quart into a pint pot unless the House actually wishes to sit well into August.
§ Rev. Martin Smyth (Belfast, South)The Leader of the House has been very helpful when I have pressed for a meeting of the Northern Ireland Grand Committee. Will he encourage the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to convene the Committee in the near future—before the recess—so that it can consider the report of the examiner's statutory rules for the past two or three years? I have been speaking to the parties from Northern Ireland that are represented here today, and they are sympathetic to that request.
§ Mr. NewtonAs the hon. Gentleman is well aware, my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State has quite a lot on his mind, and indeed his plate, at present. Much of it will have been vented earlier in Northern Ireland questions. I will, however, remind him of the pressure that the hon. Gentleman is exerting.
§ Mr. Michael Stephen (Shoreham)My right hon. Friend will be aware that, on an earlier occasion, I raised in the House the practice of granting legal aid out of public funds to persons who are not ordinarily resident in this country. Can he find time for a debate on that important subject? As I am sure he will know, our constituents consider it entirely wrong that they should be denied legal aid on the ground that there is not enough money in the fund, although they have paid taxes all their lives, while there seems to be enough money to grant legal aid to foreign persons.
§ Mr. NewtonThat is request for debate No. 4. In the event of future requests, I shall want a signed piece of paper offering me an undertaking that the hon. Member concerned will be here in August. Meanwhile, I can tell my hon. Friend—perhaps more helpfully, although my first remark was also intended in a friendly spirit—that the Lord Chancellor intends to issue a White Paper on the future of legal aid before the summer recess, although whether there will be time for it to be debated before the summer recess is a more questionable proposition.
§ Mr. Kevin Hughes (Doncaster, North)Has the Leader of the House seen my early-day motion 972?
[That this house is concerned about the recent change of legal interpretation of regulations by Television Licensing, whereby it was previously accepted that, providing there was no simultaneous use, a television licence for the main home would also cover the use of a 444 television at a second home (including static caravans); observes that this change of interpretation now means that even where it is proven that there is no simultaneous use of a television a second licence will need to be purchased; recognises that many retired people have static caravans and could not afford two television licences; and urges the Government to change the Consolidated Television Licence Fee Regulations 1991 in order that Television Licensing can reinstate its original interpretation in particular for retired people.]
The motion concerns people who are forced to buy two television licences, although there is no simultaneous viewing. The situation has been caused not by any change of regulations by the Government, but by a change in legal interpretation. Will the Leader of the House ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage to make a statement in the House about how she intends to redress the position? It is clearly unfair: people cannot be in two places at once, so why should they be charged twice for one service?
§ Mr. NewtonI will certainly bring that point to the attention of my right hon. Friend.
§ Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham)May we have a debate next week on early-day motion 981?
[That this House notes the statement of the honourable Member for Falkirk West, when referring to the Leader of the Opposition, that it ill becomes the product of an elitist school who has rejected the local education authority system for his own offspring to pontificate on teaching methods in comprehensives; admires his courage in defying the party spin-doctors; and finds his comments revealing in highlighting the real opinions of Labour backbenchers.]
My right hon. Friend will recall that the motion highlights a particularly vicious attack on the Leader of the Opposition by a senior Labour Back Bencher. Such a debate would allow that hon. Member, and a long string others who have indulged in similar practices, to defy the spin doctors and come to the House to articulate their views on the leader of their own party.
§ Mr. NewtonMy hon. Friend rightly draws attention to the scale and extent of divisions in the Labour party on education policy, which were no doubt also visible during the debate earlier this week. If I can find further opportunities to make them even more visible, I shall of course do my best.
§ Mr. Andrew Mackinlay (Thurrock)The Leader of the House will be pleased to know that he can count on my support for the structural order relating to Essex. I ask him, however, to consider the point made by the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood). If so many orders are to be debated in only two or three hours, 80 or 90 hon. Members may legitimately wish to have their say. I feel that we need more parliamentary time to discuss such a long list of orders.
May we have a statement about lindane getting into the food chain? A number of hon. Members on both sides of the House are deeply concerned about that. One of your distinguished deputies, Madam Speaker, before being elevated, initiated a powerful Adjournment debate about it some time ago. We do not want to encounter the same 445 problems that we have encountered in relation to other aspects of the food chain. The matter requires urgent consideration and debate, and a statement from a Minister.
§ Mr. NewtonI will bring that last request to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment. As for the hon. Gentleman's first point, it was not actually a request for another debate, but it was close to being one, which would make it No. 5. I take note of it—in addition to the points raised by one or two hon. Members—but some judgment really must be made about how long the House wants to go on sitting.
§ Mr. Peter Thurnham (Bolton, North-East)Will my hon. Friend bear in mind the need for a debate on adoption? The Government have published a draft Bill on the subject, and the end of the consultation period in relation to it is 28 June. It would be very helpful if we could have a debate, if not before that date, very shortly after it.
§ Mr. NewtonThat is request No. 6. The list grows by the minute—but once again, in my usual spirit of friendly co-operation, I will add it to what I have come to call my little list.
§ Mr. Barry FieldOn a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. When you and Madam Speaker—who is the guardian of Back Benchers' rights in the House—are privy to the recess dates for the summer recess, if we are likely to be sitting into August, may I ask that you put in a kind word on behalf of the Member of Parliament for the Isle of Wight? The royal yacht will be visiting Cowes week in the first week of August—for the very last time, because it will be going off to Hong Kong—and I am sure that all my constituents will wish me to be there, as I have fought so valiantly to retain it. It will be a very historic occasion.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Geoffrey Lofthouse)Being a kind man, I have noted what the hon. Gentleman said.