HC Deb 23 March 1978 vol 946 cc1746-52
Mr. Speaker

Mr. Foot—Business Statement.

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Michael Foot)

The business when the House resumes after Easter will be as follows:

MONDAY 3RD APRIL—Supply [12th Allotted Day]: there will be a debate on The Royal Air Force, on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.

Remaining stages of the Gun Barrel Proof Bill [Lords].

Motions relating to the Public Health (Aircraft) and (Ships) (Amendment) Regulations.

TUESDAY 4TH APRIL and WEDNESDAY 5TH APRIL—Further progress in Committee on the Wales Bill.

THURSDAY 6TH APRIL—Second Reading of the Independent Broadcasting Authority Bill and of the Co-operative Development Agency Bill.

Motion on EEC Documents R/2005/ 76 and R/ 2641/76 on freshwater fish and shellfish growth.

FRIDAY 7TH APRIL—Private Members' motions.

Mr. David Steel

Will the Leader of the House say something further about the business for next Thursday week, when two Bills are to be taken together? Since the Co-operative Development Agency Bill is a matter to which the whole House attaches great importance, will he ensure that it will not be brought before the House at too late an hour for it to be fully debated?

Mr. Foot

I hope that that will not be the case. I hope that arrangements will be made to have the Second Reading of that Bill at a fairly early time during that day. I hope that the arrrangements will be such as to suit the convenience of the House. I think the House will welcome the fact that we have been able to bring forward this Bill at a fairly early stage, and I believe there will be a full opportunity to debate it.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

Bearing in mind that in other years Governments of both political complexions have conveniently made announcements of increases and unpalatable statements during recesses, may I ask my right hon. Friend to promise that any such matters that may emerge in the recess, such as announcements about an increase in the television licence fee, will be held up until such time as we resume? Will my right hon. Friend ensure that such announcements are made to the House rather than that they should be slipped through and leaked to the Press during the recess?

Mr. Foot

Whatever may have been done by previous Governments, this Government have not acted in the manner described.

Mr. Lewis

Yes, they did. Ask your Front Bench colleagues.

Mr. Foot

We have no intention in this recess of following the bad example set by the Conservatives.

Mr. Lewis

The Government did it last time.

Mr. Speaker

Order. I wish the hon. Gentleman a happy Easter.

Mr. Peter Walker

In view of the eagerness of the Leader of the House to debate the subject of steel, will he guarantee a debate on the White Paper very soon?

Mr. Foot

Of course there must be a debate when the Bill is presented to the House, As for other time for a debate, I would point out that a week or two ago it was the choice of the official Opposition—and I know that the right hon. Gentleman's influence with the official Opposition is not always decisive—to debate the report of the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries on the subject of steel. That fact must influence the amount of time to be allocated to a further debate.

Mr. Spearing

May I draw attention to items Nos. 5, 6 and 7 on the Order Paper? They are three apparently innocuous Statutory Instruments, but is my right hon. Friend aware that they disguise no fewer than 11 EEC treaties, printed in seven volumes? If they are to be debated upstairs after the recess, is my right hon. Friend aware that there will be only one-and-a-half hours available to debate each treaty, which involves arrangements between, on the one hand, the EEC and Syria, Jordan, Egypt and Lebanon and between the EEC and Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco on the other hand? Will he undertake to allow the Committee upstairs to debate these treaties—which may be important but we do not know because we have not yet read them—for more than one-and-a-half hours?

Mr. Foot

I cannot give a promise, but I shall examine the matter in view of my right hon. Friend's representations and detailed knowledge of the subject matter.

Mr. Tebbit

Will the right hon. Gentleman be more forthcoming about the steel debate? He will recollect that when we debated the report of the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries it was not known that the Government were to secure the redundancies of 40,000 men. Is he not eager to make a further statement so that he can explain how many of the men affected will obtain the jobs which he personally guaranteed they would have if they were made redundant following the Beswick review?

Mr. Foot

The hon. Gentleman knows as little about this subject as he does about many of the other subjects in which he seeks to instruct the House in such a pompous manner. He is not aware of the undertakings given, as I am. The House will have to debate the proposals which the Government will make to assist the steel industry in the future. That is the position and has always been the case. All I was underlining earlier was that it was the choice of the official Opposition to debate the Select Committee's report. That must be taken into account in allocating further time. I am sure that will be seen as a reasonable proposition.

Mr. Molloy

Will my right hon. Friend consider having a debate on the National Health Service, particularly its administration? There are bitter feelings throughout the entire structure of the service following the reorganisation inflicted by the right hon. Member for Leeds, North-East (Sir K. Joseph). That reorganisation was as disastrous as the Conservative policies that were inflicted on local government. Therefore, in the interests of the health of the nation, may we debate these matters so that we may assess the damage done by the right hon. Gentleman's reorganisation and consider what must be done urgently to put the NHS right?

Mr. Foot

I cannot promise an early debate on the subject. One of the difficulties of such a debate would be that one could find nobody in the House to defend the Conservative proposals.

Mr. Warren

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain why there has been so much delay in bringing forward legislation to revise the Official Secrets Act? When will that legislation be brought forward?

Mr. Foot

I cannot give any promise, but there is no prospect of such legislation this Session. We have said that there will be a White Paper on the subject. When that is produced the House will wish to consider what time it wants to devote to it. I repeat that there is no prospect of legislation this Session, eager though many of us would be to see the legislation brought forward.

Mr. William Hamilton

Will my right hon. Friend say whether after the recess there will be an early debate on foreign affairs? Furthermore, when may we expect to see the report of the Select Committee on Procedure?

Mr. Foot

In reply to the second matter, I do not have a date when that report will be brought forward. I imagine that it will not be very long. But if after the recess I can give an indication to my hon. Friend and the House when we are likely to obtain that report, I shall try to do so.

In reply to my hon. Friend's first point, I must tell him that we do not have an immediate proposal to debate foreign affairs. But he will be aware that there are various ways in which the House may choose to have such a debate.

Mr. Christopher Price

May I draw my right hon. Friend's attention to the fact that an EEC document on Cyprus was presented to the House yesterday and that, although it was entitled "Translation", a substantial proportion of it remained written in French? Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the presentation of documents to the House in languages other than English is out of order and guarantee that the next EEC documents will be written in the English language?

Mr. Foot

I shall certainly look at the point raised by my hon. Friend. Deep as is my respect for the French language, I agree that all documents presented to the House should be presented clearly in English.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I shall call those hon. Members who have been seeking to catch my eye from the start.

Sir A. Meyer

Since no one wants to talk about Welsh devolution and many people want to talk about the effects of the Government's cuts on the steel industry in Wales, will the Leader of the House alter the business to enable the Secretary of State for Wales to explain why, having demanded in 1973 larger investment in steel in Wales, he is now supporting a plan that will mean a massive loss of jobs at Port Talbot in his own constituency?

Mr. Foot

The general position and the background to the situation on steel was given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry yesterday and I think that most of the House understands that the general background is an unprecedented collapse of the steel industry throughout the Western world and beyond in the past six months. The hon. Gentleman and everyone else from steel constituencies must take that fact into account. Of course my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Wales will, at the proper time, be prepared to engage in debate on the subject in the House.

Mr. Adley

In view of the tragedy being played out off the coast of Brittany, will the Leader of the House bear in mind that those of us who represent coastal constituencies in the South and West are extremely anxious that the Government should take positive action with our French partners to try to control the movement of oil tankers in the Channel and off our coast? Is he aware that there are a number of factors and events

surrounding the latest collision which are extremely disturbing? Can he give an assurance that the Government will provide an opportunity to debate this matter?

Mr. Foot

This is a matter on which the Government and those responsible in the Government must keep the closest watch, even before there is any question of a debate. I am not ruling out a debate after the recess, but I am not promising one either. In the meantime, the Government are following with the greatest care what is happening and doing everything in their power to assist and ward off danger. My hon. Friend is going to the Channel Islands today and will be giving the most detailed consideration to ensure that we can assist in every way. After the recess, the hon. Gentleman and others may ask me again for a statement and we can consider the best way of approaching the matter.

Mr. Durant

When will the House debate the future of the water industry following the White Paper? If the right hon. Gentleman is proposing such a debate, will it be held in conjunction with the Select Committee's report on the future of the British Waterways Board?

Mr. Foot

I know that this is another candidate for debate, but I cannot offer priority for discussion in the immediate future, though I shall take into account the representations made by the hon. Gentleman and others.

Mr. Sims

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen Press reports that the Home Secretary intends to introduce measures following the Younger Report on the treatment of young adult offenders? Is he aware that the report was published nearly four years ago and that, despite assurances given by himself and his predecessor to me, it has not been debated? Will he ensure that the House has an opportunity to debate this important report before measures are brought forward?

Mr. Foot

In the light of what the hon. Gentleman has said, I shall look at any assurances that the Home Secretary and I have given on this matter and see what additional comment I should make. It may be that there are other possibilities of raising a debate. I shall check what the hon. Gentleman has said and when we resume I shall be in a position to give him a reply.

Mr. Budgen

May I remind the right hon. Gentleman that it is now 18 months since the House had a major debate on the vital question of immigration? Bearing in mind that the Select Committee on Race Relations and Immigration has reported recently, will the right hon. Gentleman invite the House to consider this matter because there are many who believe that the House of Commons has imposed some form of gag on this vital subject?

Mr. Foot

I repudiate at once any such suggestion. It is wrong for the hon. Gentleman or any other hon. Member to suggest to the country that any form of gag has been imposed. Such words are spread around and some people outside may be tempted to believe them. The hon. Gentleman knows that this is not the case and replies that I have given him on numerous occasions disprove his claim. During the period when a gag could, allegedly, have been imposed, it was open to the Opposition to ask for a debate and they could have had it. The hon. Gentleman must not try to mislead the country.

The subject will have to be discussed in the House and the Select Committee's recommendations must enter into that debate, especially since some of the recommendations appear to raise some important questions of civil liberties—and I hope that the House will rally to support civil liberties. That will have to be discussed at the same time.

Forward to