Anglo-Hungarian Conductive Education Project (Hansard, 8 April 1986)

§ Mr. Dave Nellist (Coventry, South-East)
I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 10, for the purpose of discussing a specific matter of public importance that should have urgent consideration, namely, Government financial assistance for the Anglo-Hungarian conductive education project. —[Interruption.] I am sure that Tory Members will find it even more amusing when they find out what the project is.
The matter is urgent and could not have been raised in Parliament before today because the extraordinary and moving documentary entitled "Standing up for Joe" was transmitted by the BBC only last Tuesday, 1 April. The hour-long film showed children with some of the severest physical handicaps—we shall have some more Tory laughter now—which led to extreme problems in controlling their body movements. In this country such children would receive care and compassionate treatment, but would be unlikely to make the breakthroughs shown in that film. The film showed children in Hungary who were wheelchair-bound at the beginning of their treatment at the Budapest clinic, and then showed them ice skating after two or three years of conductive education.
The matter is important because thousands of families watched that programme and within a couple of days of transmission the 1,000 information leaflets prepared for distribution had been used up. Those families were amazed at the improvement that conductive education could bring, because they had always thought that such improvements were beyond the capability of their children.
The tragedy is that the few dozen places available at the Petö clinic in Budapest for children from overseas, including those from my constituency in Coventry, presently receiving or hoping to receive treatment will be vastly oversubscribed as a result of the revelations of that documentary. The position will be exacerbated by agreements and visits agreed between the Hungarian institute, Japan and America, which will stretch the facilities beyond the reach of families in this country.
That brings me to the urgency of my request for a debate. This morning I learnt from the British Council that on 21 March the Government signed a cultural agreement with the Hungarian Government. It states: Both sides will encourage the conclusion of an agreement on co-operation between Birmingham University and the Teacher Training and Education Institute for the Motor Disabled. That paragraph refers to a project to start in Birmingham a teacher training centre to bring the full benefits of conductive education to children and families in Britain—benefits which the Paymaster General and Minister for Employment saw on his visit in late 1984 and which, despite his encouraging words, have received no concrete or specific financial support from the Government. That project can begin in September only if, in the next few days, the Government find £250,000 to assist its establishment.
That sum, which is minute compared with other expenditure which the Government consider worth while, could be added to the £200,000 already promised by 33 Birmingham city council, the £200,000 given by Dr. Barnardo's and the £75,000 given by the Parkinson's Disease Society. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Science, who is in the Chamber, said on 29 October 1985 that no funds were available from the Government. It could be done on a pound-for-pound basis, as the Government offered in 1981 in a press release entitled £1 for £1 to help mentally handicapped children to assist the charities which have already raised pound;500,000.
The project could bring enormous and extraordinary benefits of conductive education to Britain and to the tens of thousands of families affected here. It is impossible in this short debate—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman has had four minutes. Will he bring his remarks to a close?

§ Mr. Nellist
It is impossible in such a short application to convey the full impact—[Interruption.]

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman asks leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that he believes should have urgent consideration, namely, the Government's financial assistance for the Anglo-Hungarian conductive educational project.

§ Mr. Nellist
rose—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I am on my feet. The hon. Gentleman knows that the rule is that three minutes are allowed for applications under Standing Order No. 10. I told the hon. Gentleman that he had already had four minutes, and I must now deal with the matter.
I listened with great care to what the hon. Gentleman said, and I hope that he will have further opportunities to raise this matter, but I regret that I do not consider that it is appropriate for discussion under Standing Order No. 10 and I cannot, therefore, submit his application to the House.

§ Mr. Nellist
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Could you or the Clerks tell me how much time the hon. Member for St. Ives (Mr. Harris) had to make his application? I was about 40 seconds away from finishing my application. This is the first time that I have seen you stop an hon. Member during his concluding remarks in an important application under Standing Order No. 10.

§ Mr. Speaker
This is the first occasion on which the time allowed has been exceeded. The hon. Member for St. Ives (Mr. Harris) spoke for just more than three minutes. I indicated to him that his time was up and he sat clown. I warned the hon. Gentleman that he had spoken for four minutes. This is a rule of the House, not my rule.