Business of the House (Hansard, 12 March 1991)

§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John MacGregor)
With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a short business statement.
The Opposition have decided that, instead of the debate on the national health service previously announced for the first half of tomorrow, there will now be a debate, until about Seven o'clock, on an Opposition motion described as "The Urgent Need for the Abolition of the Poll Tax". Afterwards, there will be a debate on an Opposition motion described as "Family Hardship in the Recession", followed by a motion to take note of the report by the European Court of Auditors for 1989 and a motion on the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (Immunities and Privileges) Order.

§ Dr. John Cunningham (Copeland)
Is not the real reason why the Leader of the House has made a business statement not that the Opposition have changed the business for the Supply day, which could have been displayed in the No Lobby, but that the Government have made a mess of dealing with the European bank for reconstruction and development order in Committee and must now bring it to the Floor of the House? Will the Leader of the House guarantee that, when we debate the poll tax tomorrow, there will be a Minister able to give the House and the country a clear idea of whether the Government will stop dithering, swithering and muddling, and simply abolish it?

§ Mr. MacGregor
There are two reasons for my making a business statement today. First, the Opposition have changed the subject of tomorrow's debate, and I wanted, for the convenience of the House, to inform hon. Members. Of course, a Minister will be involved in the debate. Secondly, I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me the opportunity to say that the European bank for reconstruction and development order went to the joint Committee on Statutory Instruments last Tuesday and some defects were found in the original order. A new order has been laid to remedy the defects. It could not be taken in Standing Committee in time for the order to go to the Privy Council scheduled for next week.

Several Hon. Members
rose—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. May I say to hon. Members who are rising that their questions must relate directly to the change of business and nothing else.

§ Mr. James Wallace (Orkney and Shetland)
The Leader of the House has announced a debate to take place tomorrow, initiated by the Labour party, on the abolition of the poll tax. Does he have notice of the motion? He will recall that, when we last debated that subject, the Labour party proposed no alternative to the poll tax. When the voters have a choice, as they had in Ribble Valley, they will vote for a party that wants to abolish the poll tax and has a coherent alternative.

§ Mr. MacGregor
I do not want to start discussing the merits this afternoon, because they are a matter for tomorrow's debate, and an important Bill is to receive its Second Reading debate this afternoon. I do not think that the voters of Ribble Valley looked carefully at what the 810 Liberal Democrats were putting forward—if they had, they would have come to a different view. In answer to the hon. Gentleman's substantive question, I do not have notice of any motion.

§ Mr. John Butterfill (Bournemouth, West)
Does my right hon. Friend believe that the reason that the Opposition requested the change was because they were more concerned to explain away the record poll tax set by Lambeth borough council than in the health of the national health service?

§ Mr. MacGregor
I certainly expect, and suspect, that the issue of Lambeth's community charge will come up in tomorrow's debate.

§ Mr. Ted Rowlands (Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney)
Given that there is to be a change of business tomorrow, is it not extraordinary that the Prime Minister has not made a statement to the House about his discussions yesterday with the German Government? Surely we should have an opportunity to discuss such a vital issue.

§ Mr. MacGregor
The Prime Minister not only made an important speech yesterday, which I am sure all hon. Members heard, but answered questions on the issue this afternoon.

§ Mr. Michael Latham (Rutland and Melton)
If the Opposition have run out of things to say on the national health service, could we have a Government debate on the subject next week?

§ Mr. MacGregor
I hope that my hon. Friend will forgive me, but that question goes beyond tomorrow's business.

§ Mrs. Alice Mahon (Halifax)
Would not a debate on the poll tax give the Prime Minister a good opportunity to answer the questions that he has refused to answer today? Will the Leader of the House get the Prime Minister to the Dispatch Box to express his regret for his enthusiastic support that he showed for that dreadful tax over the years when he was a senior member of the Government?

§ Mr. MacGregor
The debate will be on an Opposition motion, so I am sure that the House will be interested to hear the answers given about Opposition policies on the issue.

§ Mr. Rupert Allason (Torbay)
My right hon. Friend will be aware that there is widespread pressure from Conservative Members for a Question Time for questions to be put to the Opposition—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. That is not in the business statement.

§ Mr. Allason
It is about tomorrow.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Member will have heard what I said—questions must refer to the business for tomorrow.

§ Mr. Allason
Does my right hon. Friend agree that tomorrow afternoon would provide an ideal opportunity for the Opposition to detail their exact proposals for an alternative to the community charge?

§ Mr. MacGregor
Certainly, since the Opposition have chosen the subject for tomorrow's debate, I have no doubt that many questions will be asked of the Opposition in that debate.

§ Mr. Harry Ewing (Falkirk, East)
Is the Leader of the House aware that normally, when a new Member waits to take his seat, I would not ask a question, but as the Liberal Whip, the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Wallace), chose to hold up the proceedings, I feel free to join in the questioning?
Will the Leader of the House look at his briefing material and tell us the last time a Leader of the House advised the House in a business statement about a change of business for an Opposition Supply day? In view of tomorrow's motion for the quick abolition of the poll tax, will Government Members be in the Lobby with us to vote against the abolition of the poll tax, or in the other Lobby —or will they be in both Lobbies?

Mr. MacGregorcc
The first point in the hon. Gentleman's question was a long way of delaying proceedings. There were two changes in tomorrow's business, and I thought it would be for the convenience of the House if I informed it of that.
As for the vote, the hon. Gentleman had better wait and see what happens tomorrow.

Several Hon. Members
rose—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. As this is such a narrow statement, the questions now are a little repetitive, so I shall take two more from each side, and then we shall move on.

§ Mr. Geoffrey Dickens (Littleborough and Saddleworth)
Does the Leader of the House agree that to have a debate tomorrow on the community charge or the poll tax—call it what one will—is a gross misuse of parliamentary time? We are in the middle of a review, the result of which will be announced shortly, as the Prime Minister told us four times this afternoon. The Opposition were invited to say their piece and make their input into our review, but refused, although other parties agreed. What on earth are we wasting parliamentary time for?

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman should make that speech tomorrow.

§ Mr. MacGregor
My hon. Friend makes his point loud and clear. I cannot be held accountable for what the Opposition decide to do or how many times they change their mind.

§ Mr. Ron Brown (Edinburgh, Leith)
Surely the Leader of the House understands one thing about tomorrow's important debate about the poll tax. The rethink that is apparently going on in Government circles has nothing to do with fancy speeches in this place—it is all to do with the mass struggle, the gut reaction of working-class people throughout Britain, and the by-election.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman must make that speech tomorrow, if he is called. The hon. Gentleman must ask a question. These are debating points. Bring it to an end, Ron.

§ Mr. Brown
It is unlikely that I will be called, because many people on the Left are not called. Could the Leader of the House arrange for members of the Anti-Poll Tax Union to meet Ministers to express their views and feelings about the poll tax? That is important.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Really, that has nothing to do with the business for tomorrow.

§ Mr. Bill Walker (Tayside, North)
My right hon. Friend will be aware that two separate pieces of legislation brought about the community charge. Will he confirm that any proposals made by the Opposition or anyone eke should take that into account? Shall we have the opportunity fully to debate both pieces of legislation?

§ Mr. MacGregor
I simply do not know what the Opposition will say tomorrow. The debate will be an opportunity to probe them on their position.

§ Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)
Will the Leader of the House make arrangements tomorrow for the Prime Minister to put the Government's case on the poll tax? He has failed to do it until now. Is the Prime Minister waiting for George Bush to give him the answer?

§ Mr. MacGregor
I am sure that the hon. Gentleman was waiting to get that in at Prime Minister's questions. If I may say so, it was a weak point. The Prime Minister has made it perfectly clear that we shall announce the outcome of the review at the appropriate time. The hon. Gentleman can be sure that the Prime Minister will be fully in command of that.