HC Deb 15 March 1984 vol 56 cc507-11 3.30 pm
Mr. Neil Kinnock (Islwyn)

Will the Leader of the House state the business of the House for next week?

The Lord Privy Seal and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John Biffen)

Yes, Sir. The business for next week will be as follows:

MONDAY 19 MARCH—Conclusion of the debate on the Budget statement. Lords amendment to the Education (Grants and Awards) Bill. Motion on the European Assembly Constituencies (Wales) Order.

TUESDAY 20 MARCH—There will be a debate on a motion, to take note of the sixth to thirtieth reports in Session 1981–82 from the Committee of Public Accounts, the first to eleventh reports and the first special report in Session 1982–83, and the first to ninth reports in Session 1983–84 and the relevant Government observations.

Motion on the Rate Support Grant Supplementary Report (England) (No. 2)

WEDNESDAY 21 MARCH—Opposition day (eleventh Allotted Day) (Second Part): There will be a debate on an Opposition motion on fuel costs and poverty.

Motion on European Community document 7619/83 on developments in information technology (esprit)

Motion relating to overseas travel for the Computer Sub-Committee of the House of Commons (Services) Committee.

Consideration of any Lords amendments which may be received.

The Chairman of Ways and Means has named opposed private business for consideration at seven o'clock.

THURSDAY 22 MARCH—There will be a debate on foreign affairs, on a motion for the Adjournment of the House. Afterwards, a debate on CAP price proposals. The relevant document numbers will appear in the Official Report.

FRIDAY 23 MARCH—Private Members' Bills

MONDAY 26 MARCH—Progress on remaining stages of the Trade Union Bill.

The House will wish to know, Mr. Speaker that it will be proposed that the House should rise for the Easter adjournment on Friday 13 April until Wednesday 25 April.

[European Community Documents and relevant

The following documents are relevant:

  1. (i) Foreign Affairs
  2. (ii) CAP Price proposals

Mr. Kinnock

I thank the Leader of the House for his announcement of the foreign affairs debate next Thursday, which will be on the Adjournment of the House. May we have a continued foreign affairs debate, since there is such a diversity of matters of concern that one debate in Government time is not likely to be enough during the next couple of months?

Although the right hon. Gentleman has arranged that the debate on the common agricultural policy will be on the Adjournment, can he assure the House that there will be discussions to change the format of the motion if events during the next week require it?

May I point out to the right hon. Gentleman that we shall still wish to have a debate in Government time on the European summit as quickly as possible after the conclusion of the summit on 20 March?

Mr. Biffen

I accept that the European summit meeting next week will require consideration by the House as soon as possible and it will be subject to the usual discussions through the usual channels.

I confirm that the debate on the CAP price proposals, which now stands on a motion for the Adjournment of the House, could be revised in the light of subsequent developments.

I note the right hon. Gentleman's generosity in acknowledging the value of having a foreign affairs debate next week and his near greed in suggesting another reasonably shortly thereafter—not greed, mere optimism.

Dr. David Owen (Plymouth, Devonport)

May I explore that answer a little more carefully with the Leader of the House? Is he saying that the debate on Thursday will become a debate on the European summit on a motion rather than on the Adjournment of the House if there were to be a serious breakdown in the discussions? May I put it to the right hon. Gentleman that it is quite unacceptable that we should now be having the 11th Labour Supply day? Despite calling them Opposition days, they are completely monopolised by the Labour party, which decides whether any other party can have time. It has told us that they will be entirely Labour days and that no more days will be offered to any other Opposition parties. Is that fair and just? How does the right hon. Gentleman explain that in his role, not as a Conservative politician, but as Leader of the House with responsibility to all parts of the House?

Mr. Biffen

I am obliged by the rules of the House and until they are altered I shall continue to conduct my affairs as I do.

Dr. Owen

Change them.

Mr. Biffen

As to the earlier point, if the right hon. Gentleman consults Hansard he will see that the Leader of the Opposition had in mind the second debate on Thursday 22 March on the CAP price proposals.

Dr. Owen

That is not good enough.

Mr. James Molyneaux (Lagan Valley)

In case there might be a misunderstanding may I place on record our appreciation of the fact that the Opposition have granted us our fair share of their Supply days?

Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to table a motion next week making it possible for us to debate our prayer against the Regional Rates (Regional Rate) Order (Northern Ireland) 1984 in the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments?

Mr. Biffen

I note the right hon. Gentleman's first point. I think it unwise for me to intrude into these relationships. It is bad enough conducting my job strictly on the terms of reference of the rules of the House.

I am happy to look at the right hon. Gentleman's second point. I can promise nothing, but perhaps it can be considered through the usual channels.

Mr. John Heddle (Mid-Staffordshire)

Has my right hon. Friend seen early-day motion 567, which relates to an order tabled by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment?

[That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that the Rating (Exemption of Unoccupied Industrial Hereditaments) Regulations 1984 (S.I., 1984 No. 221), dated 28th February 1984, a copy of which was laid before this House on 8th March, be annulled.] Will my right hon. Friend try to find time next week or the week after to debate that matter, bearing in mind that the order will come into effect on 31 March? There are Conservative Members who do not consider that the order, which extends wide-ranging relief to industrial premises, achieves our manifesto commitment.

Mr. Biffen

I shall look at the point that my hon. Friend raises but I do not want him to be too optimistic.

Mrs. Renée Short (Wolverhampton, North-East)

Is the Leader of the House aware that the Select Committee's report on the Griffiths proposals is published today? As the Secretary of State for Social Services has expressed the wish that there should be a debate in the House as early as possible, will he bear that in mind and see whether it is possible to have such a debate before the Easter recess?

Mr. Biffen

I am happy to reaffirm that I regard it as an important topic. I can make no promises, but I shall certainly consider the matter sympathetically.

Mr. Tony Marlow (Northampton, North)

Since our accession to the European Community was a major constitutional issue, confirmed later by referendum, which is limited in its financial implications to the 1 per cent. VAT ceiling, if, at a later stage that were to be increased, that would again have major implications for our constitution and sovereignty. Does my right hon. Friend agree that in those circumstances it is important that the matter should be fully debated and that primary legislation should be brought before the House?

Mr. Biffen

The most prudent thing that I can say at this stage is that it would be foolish for me to try to anticipate the outcome of the European Council meeting.

Mr. Max Madden (Bradford, West)

The Leader of the House will have seen early-day motion 578 entitled "Parliamentary Inquiries and Use of Select Committees". He will be aware that a number of hon. Members have withdrawn from the Register of Members' Interests in protest at the recent remarks of the chairman of the Select Committee. Will he tell the House where the Select Committee now is in regard to the formal complaints which have been made regarding the Prime Minister's involvement with and knowledge of her son's business interests?

[That this House notes that the Select Committee on Members' Interests has been considering formal complaints alleging the Prime Minister's failure to declare and to register her interests in relation to the Cementation contract in Oman; and believes that the House should use its committees to clear the matter up and end public speculation.]

Mr. Biffen

I understand that the Select Committee on Members' Interests is meeting this afternoon, and our Order Paper informs us of that fact. I am sure that the whole House will be concerned to have an early report from the Committee.

Dr. Alan Glyn (Windsor and Maidenhead)

Will the Leader of the House consider extending the length of the foreign affairs debate, as we are to have only one day's debate on subjects that are very far-ranging at this time?

Mr. Biffen

I shall certainly look at that proposition.

Mr. Eddie Loyden (Liverpool, Garston)

As the situation in Liverpool at the moment should be of great concern to the right hon. Gentleman and to the Government, will he arrange in the vey near future for a debate on the Floor of the House in order that this matter can be discussed fully?

Mr. Biffen

Certainly no provision has been made for next week, but I shall draw the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment to the point that has just been made.

Mr. Nicholas Budgen (Wolverhampton, South-West)

Will my right hon. Friend agree that, if the Government apply for an increase in the own resources of the EEC, they should honour the undertaking given by my right hon. Friend Lord Whitelaw on 24 November 1977 that this should be done only by Act of Parliament?

Mr. Biffen

As we are not yet at that ditch, I am not prepared to jump.

Mr. Gavin Strang (Edinburgh, East)

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is quite unprecedented and disgraceful for the debate on the common agricultural policy annual price proposals to take place after 10 o'clock? Is he aware that for over 10 years that debate has been the one day's debate on the agricultural industry generally and that to have it after 10 o'clock is not only unacceptable to the House but an insult of the hundreds of thousands of people who earn their living in the agricultural and food industries?

Mr. Biffen

I appreciate the feeling with which the hon. Gentleman speaks. I am not sure that what is now being proposed is wholly without precedent. I have to take account of the very considerable interest there is in the House that we should have a foreign affairs debate, and we simply have to proceed along the lines that I have indicated.

Mr. John Browne (Winchester)

Will my right hon. Friend accept that there is a growing use of space for both active and passive military purposes, which is leading to growing concern among a large number of people? Please may we have a debate on this subject so as to prevent the unnecessary proliferation of active military uses of space?

Mr. Biffen

I think that that is a campaign which my hon. Friend can best further by himself seeking an Adjournment debate.

Mr. Doug Hoyle (Warrington, North)

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen early-day motion 560 on hare coursing? It is signed by 68 right hon. and hon. Members and calls for the introduction of a Bill to bring to an end this barbaric sport? Will he allow time for it to be debated, because the majority of the population want that to be done as quickly as possible?

[That this House calls for the reintroduction of the Hare Coursing Bill and for the Government to provide Parliamentary time in order to bring to an end this barbaric sport as quickly as possible.]

Mr. Biffen

Any legislation on this topic would probably proceed, but through the normal disciplines of private Member's time.

Mr. Peter Bruinvels (Leicester, East)

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the serious disquiet felt regarding the Lion intoximeter 3000, as reported in the Daily Express? Will he provide time for an urgent debate on the subject, since the machine seems to be completely unreliable?

Mr. Biffen

I wish my hon. Friend every success in the Adjournment debate that I know he will now seek.

Mr. Robert Parry (Liverpool, Riverside)

Will the Leader of the House ask his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to consider the substantial loss of earnings by British seamen caused by his Budget proposal to phase out tax relief on overseas earnings? Is it not scandalous that seamen who have to work all over the world to earn their living should be bracketed with the very rich who spend most of their lives on world cruises?

Mr. Biffen

The problem of seamen's earnings could well be referred to either later today or on Monday, when there will be debates on Budget proposals.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)

Following on what the leader of the Social Democratic party said on the allocation of Supply days, will the Leader of the House take into account the fact that there might be an opportunity if the leader of the SDP joined with the leader of the Liberals to decide on a debate in which the House could discuss why, although there is supposed to be joint selection, in the London, South-East constituency there is a Liberal and a Socialist—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I am sorry to keep on stopping the hon. Gentleman, but the Leader of the House is not responsible for that matter.

Mr. Skinner

I have not got to my point.

Mr. Speaker

Order. The Leader of the House is not responsible for negotiations or talks that go on elsewhere.

Mr. Skinner

It is a debate.

Mr. Speaker

Order. If the hon. Gentleman will put a question—

Mr. Skinner

I have done.

Mr. Speaker

A question about the business next week.

Mr. Skinner

If the Leader of the House cannot arrange such a debate next week—or any other week for that matter—will he take into account the fact that it will be difficult to arrange a Supply day on the night when the Leader of the SDP has a dinner arranged at £27.50 plus VAT?

Mr. Speaker

Does the Leader of the House wish to answer?

Mr. Biffen

Clearly, it is not a take-away dinner. Like most other topics for debate, it seems highly suitable for the Adjournment, and I can think of no better Member to raise it than the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner).