§ The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. St. John-Stevas)The business for next week will be as follows:
MONDAY 9 JUNE—Remaining stages of the Health Services Bill.
TUESDAY 10 JUNE—Progress on remaining stages of the Tenants' Rights, Etc. (Scotland) Bill.
Debate on the report of the Committee of Three on Community institutions.
1677 WEDNESDAY 11 JUNE—Completion of remaining stages of the Tenants' Rights, Etc. (Scotland) Bill.
THURSDAY 12 JUNE—Supply [18th Alloted Day]: Until about Seven o'clock there will be a debate on disablement, and afterwards on the construction industry. Both debates will arise on Opposition motions.
§ Motion on the Diocese in Europe Church Measure.
§ FRIDAY 13 JUNE—Debate on the report of the committee of inquiry into the engineering profession under the chairmanship of Sir Montague Finniston (Cmnd 7794.)
§ MONDAY 16 JUNE—Debate on the report of the Brandt Commission, on a motion for the Adjournment.
§ [Debate on report from Committee of Three on Europe:
§ Relevant published report of the European Legislation etc. Committee—18th Report para, 2 H/C 159—xviii 1979–80.]
Mr. CallaghanWill the Leader of the of the House take note that our debate on disablement will be about the adverse effects of the Government's policies on the disabled? The short debate on the construction industry will be to press the Government for a higher level of activity in that industry because of the serious unemployment that is occurring in it.
Finally, I should like to ask the Leader of the House about the EEC budget announcement. Now that we begin to examine the small print, we see that the arrangements are not quite as favourable as they seemed at first sight. May we assume that the Government, on an important matter such as this, will now arrange a debate, for which we will certainly wish to ask?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for the information on the Opposition's motions. If I had had that information earlier, I should have been happy to announce it on his behalf.
I think that there is a case for a debate on the EEC budget, but it should be taken up and discussed through the usual channels.
§ Mr. Hugh FraserIn view of the Venice summit, which is about to take place, if there is not time for a debate could my right hon. Friend arrange for a Foreign Office Minister to make a statement describing the exact nature of the Western-Middle Eastern peace initiative, which has received scant praise from either the President of Egypt or the President of the United States? Otherwise, we may be faced with one of those unfortunate situations in which what is undertaken by a British Foreign Secretary is later destroyed by the House of Commons.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI shall certainly pass on that request to my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal. I have had no request for a statement by my right hon. Friend till now.
§ Mr. DubsDoes the Leader of the House agree that there is an urgent need for a debate on jury vetting, given that the practice, which has been called unconstitutional by at least one judge, is now taking place in courts all over the country and that undertakings given by the Attorney-General to the House are being ignored?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasThere has been a further development in this matter, with another decision by, I think, the House of Lords. Therefore, we have to consider this matter in regard to the situation in the courts. However, as soon as it is disposed of in that manner I shall consider the hon. Gentleman's request.
§ Mr. Kenneth BakerMy right hon. Friend has given undertakings in the past that before we rise for the Summer Recess there will be an opportunity to discuss the outstanding recommendations of the Procedure Committee, in particular the proposal about the Public Bill procedure whereby Standing Committees will be allowed to take evidence for two, three or four sittings before proceeding to the discussion of a Bill. May I have his added reassurance that the House will be able to come to a decision on this matter before we rise for the Summer Recess?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI have given that assurance to the House. If the House does not accept that assurance, I do not know that reassurance adds very much to it, because presumably all the currency is invalidated together. It is the Government's clear intention, as stated in the 1679 manifesto that the House will have an early opportunity to come to a decision on all the proposals in that report. We shall be placing proposals before the House before the Summer Recess.
§ Mr. DouglasWill the Leader of the House consider asking his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry to place in the Library or the Vote Office a precis of the information submitted to him by the various institutions regarding the Finneston report, to aid us in the debate on Friday?
Secondly, we welcome these debates on the Finneston and Brandt reports, but will the right hon. Gentleman consider arranging an early debate on the Burgoyne committee report on offshore safety, as this is very important? While we might delay the matter, awaiting the Norwegian result, we should not delay too long in debating that important matter.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI shall certainly pass on to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry that interesting suggestion about putting documents and precis in the Library.
I cannot promise a debate in the immediate future on the Burgoyne report. We have made a good advance in this Business Statement, with debates on two extremely important reports.
§ Mr. Nicholas WintertonWill my right hon. Friend find time for an early debate on interest rates? If he cannot do that, will he get the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make a statement on interest rates, particularly as they affect small businesses? Is he aware that unless interest rates fall, small businesses, which are the seedcorn of future employment, will not exist for much longer to provide that employment?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasAs my hon. Friend knows, it is not the Government's policy to maintain high interest rates a moment longer than is economically necessary. I shall pass on his urgings to my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and I am sure that he will reflect upon them.
§ Mr. CryerWill the Leader of the House consider arranging an urgent and early debate on the textile industry, which is deeply affected by the high interest rates complained about by his hon. Friend 1680 the Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winter-ton)? Does he realise that in the first four months of this year there was a deficit of £200 million on textile goods in this country, and that over 500 jobs a week are being lost in the West Yorkshire industry? When will the Government initiate a debate so that we can check their performance and see what they are doing about it?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI am aware of the grave situation facing the British textile industry. The Government have made it quite plain that when the multi-fibre arrangement, restricting imports into this country, expires in 1981 they are determined that it will be replaced by new measures to assist the industry. I cannot promise an early debate.
§ Mr. NelsonIn view of the widespread interest in the possibility of a European initiative in the Middle East and the threat to world peace from the impasse that has been reached in the Camp David talks, will my right hon. Friend consider providing time for a major debate on the Middle East?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasWe should all like more debates on foreign affairs about——
§ Mr. Russell KerrThe Middle East.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasThe Middle East is part of foreign affairs. I am afraid that we cannot have a debate of that nature on the Middle East in the immediate future.
§ Mr. SheermanWill the right hon. Gentleman impress on his colleague the Secretary of State for Trade the importance of making an oral statement on the Tenerife air disaster—a disaster in which many of my constituents and constituents of a number of hon. Members lost their lives—at a time when holiday travel to areas such as the Spanish islands is reaching a peak? Many people are gravely concerned about the delay in the report of the investigation into the causes of that disaster.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasAs the hon. Gentleman knows, it is not possible to make a definitive statement on the disaster until the inquiries have been completed. My right lion. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade will consider making a further interim statement in the light of the outcome of meetings between an accident 1681 investigation team from his Department and the Spanish mission of investigation in Madrid, which commenced on 3 June.
§ Mr. Ian LloydI congratulate my right hon. Friend on his decision to allocate time for a debate on the Brandt and Finniston reports. Does this show a slight chink of light, in that there may now be a possibility of a debate on information technology, which embraces such subjects as Inmos and Ferranti, and the whole strategy of support for the semiconductor industry of the United Kingdom—possibly the most important series of single industrial decisions that we face?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI cannot give my hon. Friend a categoric assurance, but by disposing of debates on these two important reports we increase the statistical likelihood—whatever that may be—of a debate on the matter about which my hon. Friend is so keen.
§ Mr. CanavanWhen will the Secretary of State for Scotland make a statement about the continuing Scottish teachers' pay dispute? Instead of hiding in Whitehall, why does not the Secretary of State for Scotland tell the House that he will give local authorities the money to give teachers a big enough increase to keep up with the high rate of inflation created by this rotten Government?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasThe pay of Scottish teachers is primarily for the relevant teachers' body, and discussions are continuing.
§ Mr. Bill WalkerIn view of the considerable interest in Scotland in the proposals for the new Hampden Park, will my right hon. Friend arrange an early debate on the possibility of the Government's investing £8 million, which could be an open-ended investment, because that amount will be inadequate to supply the new Hampden? An early debate is needed.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI have noted what my hon. Friend said. I cannot promise an early debate, but I shall raise the matter with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland.
§ Mr. SkinnerWill the Leader of the House encourage the Secretary of State for Trade to make a statement on the question of the 33 United Kingdom companies paying starvation 1682 wages to black South African workers? In order to clear up any charge of hypocrisy, will he arrange for an early debate on this issue, especially as it has been revealed in The Guardian that those companies include Quinton Hazell, an offshoot of Burmah Oil, of which the husband of the Prime Minister is a director.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI do not think that that kind of personal reference, which is constantly made by the hon. Gentleman, does anything to advance the serious cause that he no doubt—[Interruption.] The fact that it was mentioned in The Guardian is no reason to repeat it in the House—possibly quite the reverse. The question is clearly a matter of considerable social importance, but I cannot promise an early debate on the subject.
§ Mr. AdleyIs my right hon. Friend aware that the continuing military occupation of the West Bank elevates the need for an urgent debate on the Middle East above that of simply a general debate on foreign affairs? Is he further aware that there would be widespread support in the House for the Government's view that we are not prepared to tolerate an American veto on any British or European initiative? Will he please take note that we need an urgent debate on this sensitive and dangerous situation?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI have noted the view expressed by my hon. Friend, and I shall give it due weight, but a number of important subjects are competing for debates.
§ Mr. Robert HughesWill the right hon. Gentleman consider inviting the Secretary of State for Trade to explain to the House and to the country why essential information about the payment by British companies of wages below starvation level to black workers in South Africa is not being published? As the Prime Minister made it clear that that information is available in the Library, what possible reason is there for hiding the information and putting the Government in the dock, along with the South African Government?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasThe point raised by the hon. Gentleman has been fully answered by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. Her answer may not 1683 have satisfied the hon. Gentleman, but she went a long way in her constructive reply, and I do not think that I can add to it.
§ Mr. MarlowWill my right hon. Friend arrange an early debate on a system of tax allowances for taxidermists, in order to encourage the Labour Party to have the Leader of the Opposition stuffed, so that he may be kept around for a little longer, in view of the fact that there are no plausible alternatives? If there is no time for such a debate, in view of the strong feelings expressed by hon. Members on the Government Benches about Irish Republican citizens being allowed to vote in our general elections, will he arrange a debate on that issue?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI do not think that I shall venture into the interesting territory that has been opened up before me by my hon. Friend. On the whole, Business Question Time is a time for a a peaceable exchange of views, and I do not wish to put that at risk.
§ Mr. WhiteheadOn the question of the list of British firms that has been compiled by Mr. Vose, our labour attaché in Pretoria, cannot the Leader of the House see the inconsistency between the Prime Minister's reply to me this afternoon—that this list is available to hon. Members—and the refusal to publish the list for public examination? Is this not a complete violation of the principle of open government, to which the Government are supposedly committed? Surely, there should be a statement from the Secretary of State for Trade.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI shall certainly bring that point to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade. But if those figures are made available in the Library, that makes them available to many articulate hon. Members, who can make good use of them.
§ Mr. HillMay I re-emphasise the plea made by my hon. Friend the Member for Havant and Waterloo (Mr. Lloyd)? The Secretary of State for Industry is at present in America discussing ways of obtaining further finance and experience from Silicon Valley for this country. Surely when he returns he will make a 1684 statement. Would that not be a suitable time at which to have a three-hour debate on this important export market, which is growing at the moment?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI agree that this is a most important subject for our trade. If there are significant developments, of course my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry will make a statement on them.
§ Mr. FootDoes the right hon. Gentleman recognise from the questions that have been put by my hon. Friends that they are asking for a statement on the matter of the wages paid to black South African workers? Although a document has been placed in the Library, we are asking for a statement in the House. In the light of what has occurred and of questions today, will not the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the matter and ask the Secretary of State for Trade to make a statement next week, giving an answer to the House of Commons on the subject?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasWith great respect to the right hon. Gentleman, there is no need for me to reconsider what I said. We have had an answer from the Prime Minister this afternoon and I have said that I shall draw the exchanges in the House this afternoon to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade.
§ Mr. John BrowneWill my right hon. Friend please reconsider his answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Chichester (Mr. Nelson) in the light of what my hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch and Lymington (Mr. Adley) said, and as actions taken by the Government in the next month or so will be critical to the lives of every man, woman and child in this country in terms of Middle East policy? Surely that deserves a debate, over and above a normal, global foreign affairs debate.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI have not promised a general debate on foreign affairs. What I am saying is that there is a great pressure on time for the remainder of this Session, and I cannot promise an early debate either on foreign affairs in general or on the Middle East in particular.
§ Several Hon. Members rose——
1685§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I am prepared to call all the hon. Gentlemen who have risen—
§ Mrs. Renée Short rose——
§ Mr. SpeakerWell, hon. Members. I beg the hon. Lady's pardon.
I am prepared to call the hon. Members who have risen, but I hope that it will be borne in mind that if they cannot get in on the first short debate there will be no point in their complaining about not being called then.
§ Mr. William HamiltonDoes the Leader of the House recognise that one day for the Health Services Bill is wholly inadequate, in view of the fact that it is a United Kingdom Bill and that in Committee there has been no opportunity to debate the structure or anything else concerned with the Health Service in Scotland? As the Government have a considerable number of new clauses and amendments to move on Report, will the right hon. Gentleman consider either suspending the rule on Monday or giving extra time on another day?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasWe have already had half a day's debate on this subject and we have a second opportunity on Monday of dealing with it. One has to balance, by discussions through the usual channels, the need for thorough debate and the need not to go on beyond a reasonable hour.
§ Mr. StoddartReverting to the question of the EEC agreement on the budget, does the right hon. Gentleman realise that this matter has some urgency, as many hon. Members are very concerned about the agreement reached, particularly in relation to higher food prices and the failure to reach a broad balance? I appreciate that this matter is to be discussed through the usual channels, but the matter is much more urgent than that. Hon. Members want a debate, and I believe that they should have that debate next week. Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the matter?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI am sure that the hon. Gentleman wishes to have a debate urgently, but we have not received urgent representations—[Interruption.] Had there been urgent representations from the Opposition Front Bench they would have been taken fully into account. But I 1686 have heard what has been said today and I shall consider what can be done.
§ Mr. StallardHas the right hon. Gentleman yet been able to see early-day motion 620, standing in my name and the names of over 100 hon. Members, representing all parties in the House? [That this House appeals to the Secretary of State for the Home Department to exercise the power of discretion available to him under the Immigration Act and withdraw the proposal to remove Verghese (Juno) and Meena Varki from the United Kingdom, in view of the fact that though technically in breach of Home Office procedure, the couple have, over the seven years they have lived in the United Kingdom, made an outstanding contribution to better the life of their neighbours, and worked effectively full" time and unpaid to promote and maintain good community relations in the Greater London area.]
The motion calls on the Home Secretary to exercise his discretion in the case of Juno and Meena Varki, two Camden residents, and in view of the widespread outside interests in this case, as well as interests inside the House and the interest in the broader principles of the Home Secretary's discretion, will the Leader of the House urgently arrange for a debate on this question?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI am aware of this case, which has aroused anxiety and concern among hon. Members for some time, but my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, after considering all the representations submitted to him by hon. Members, came to the conclusion that the deportation should proceed, and signed the order in December. Since then my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Home Office—the Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Raison)—has had two meetings with hon. Members to consider further representations—I think that the last meeting was as recently as 7 May—but he also, having examined the situation, has concluded that there are no grounds for revising the decision.
§ Mr. SoleyMay I remind the Leader of the House of his undertaking some weeks ago on the crisis in our prisons? May I ask for a date for that debate? Also, will he draw to the attention of the Attorney-General or the relevant Minister the desirability of his presence at that 1687 debate, as a number of hon Members on both sides of the House are likely to make recommendations that will affect sentencing policy, which is outside the control of the Home Secretary alone?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasThe May report is an extremely important one. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary is still receiving evidence and reactions to it, and until that evidence has been received and reflected upon it would not be right to have a debate, but it is certainly my wish to have a debate on this important report as soon as possible.
The attendance of Ministers at the debate is a matter for them. I shall pass on the hon. Member's request to them.
§ Mrs. Renée ShortWill the Leader of the House arrange for an early debate on the unemployment position in the West Midlands? Is he aware that since I last raised this matter with the Prime Minister just before the Whitsun Recess, a further blow has fallen, with the loss of 3,000 jobs at Lucas? This matter is urgent.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI saw the report of the Lucas redundancies today. The question of unemployment is of considerable and continuing concern to the Government. Its solution depends on the working out of our economic policies in due course. I cannot promise an early debate.
§ Several Hon. Members rose——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I shall call the hon. Member for Staffordshire, South-West (Mr. Cormack) after I have called those who had risen when I made my statement.
§ Mr. ColemanIs the Leader of the House aware of the worsening unemployment situation, which is affecting every constituency in Wales, arising as a result of problems of the steel industry and the coalmining industry, and the decline of the Welsh economy? When can we have a debate on the Floor of the House, in which the Secretary of State for Wales, the Minister responsible for unemployment in Wales, can answer hon. Members?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI am aware of the extremely grave unemployment situation in Wales, but I cannot promise an early debate on the Floor of the House—although 1688 we may be able to have a debate by another means.
§ Mr. SpearingThe Leader of the House said that on Tuesday there is to be a debate on EEC institutions and on a paper that has been produced. Does that indicate that the matter will be discussed at the Venice summit? What will the motion be, and how long shall we have for the debate?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasThe conclusions of this important document would be relevant to any discussions that take place at the Venice summit. The debate will probably be for one and a half hours, and it is likely to arise on either a " take note " motion or a motion for the Adjournment. That is a matter for discussion through the usual channels.
§ Mr. James A. DunnWill the Leader of the House provide time to discuss the dire plight of the people of Uganda? There is an early-day motion on the Order Paper of which I am sure the hon. Gentleman is aware.
§ [That this House, concerned with the grievous problems of the people of Uganda, aware of the effect of the drought and acknowledging the food supply shortages, with the consequential tragic deaths from starvation and deprivation, calls upon Her Majesty's Government to give immediate aid and to rally the fellow members of the United Nations to give support, sustenance, and supplies, to ease the emergency within the regions which are suffering this devastation; and further calls upon the world to come to the aid of this sadly stricken nation and to rescue its people from almost certain death.]
§ Will he also take an opportunity to discuss with the appropriate Ministers the behaviour of the BBC when it interviewed the former Prime Minister of Uganda—an interview that caused offence to many people?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI am aware of the hon. Gentleman's motion on the subject of Uganda and the desperate situation there. I am afraid that I cannot promise an early debate, although the Government are watching the situation and action is being taken through the United Nations to accord relief.
I shall bring to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary 1689 the hon. Member's point about the broadcast.
§ Mr. Allen McKayWill the Leader of the House find time for a debate on the report "Policy for Roads, 1980" which has just been issued? I am sure that many hon. Members besides myself will be disappointed after reading that their project is being reserved. This applies particularly to the Penistone constituency, which lies between the Sheffield and Barnsley areas and has inadequate transport facilities, especially as the Penistone railway link is to be cut. On 21 May, as reported in column 490 of Hansard, the Minister said that he had not received the proposals, and yet the newspapers referred to British Rail speaking to the Department on the closure. Is it not time that we had this matter cleared up?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his ingenuity in inserting that constituency point into a business question. I am sure that that will be noted elsewhere in due course.
Like the hon. Gentleman, I received the paper on roads, in published form, only today. We must wait for reactions and discussions in general before we have a full debate on the matter.
§ Mr. DalyellSpeaking in a peaceable spirit, may I ask the Leader of the House whether he has received reports on yesterday's debate on enterprise zones? Hon. Members from both sides asked the Financial Secretary a number of legitimate questions. Ultimately, we received the answer " Suck it and see." Doubtless the Leader of the House would use more felicitous language. Does he think that enterprise zones should be 1690 debated during the discussion of the Finance Bill or during debates that involve the Departments of Industry and Trade, outside the context of the Finance Bill?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasWe must all use our own language. We all have our own styles of reference. The phrase referred to by the hon. Member is not constantly on my lips. I followed the debate on enterprise zones. They are an extremely important part of the Finance Bill. They are a positive step——
§ Mr. DalyellThey are not part of the Finance Bill.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasEnterprise zones are part of the Finance Bill. They will make an important contribution to the recovery of the economy. I support them fully. It was important to bring forward the proposals and to debate them.
§ Mr. CormackWill my right hon. Friend take an early opportunity to announce the dates of the Summer Recess? Will he bear in mind that hon. Members with families would prefer to come back early in October than to sit into August?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI do not wish to be too discouraging, but those options are not necessarily alternatives. It is possible that the House will sit into August and come back in early October. I cannot make a statement about the dates of the Summer Recess now, because they will depend on the progress made on business in the House. With the Opposition's co-operation, I hope that we shall rise early and come back late. All hon. Members will then be satisfied.