Queen's Speech (Hansard, 18 November 1993)

§ Mr. David Amess (Basildon)

When we were summoned to the other place earlier today to listen to the Gracious Speech, and Her Majesty the Queen told us that she and her husband looked forward to a tour of Caribbean countries next spring, one or two people, I dare say, might have been envious. I am very proud of our royal family and I thought that today's ceremony was quite magnificent. The procedures that we carry out here demonstrate what each and every one of us believes in—our democracy and the freedom to speak and to elect representatives to argue their case in this Chamber.

I was very pleased when Her Majesty the Queen went on to tell us that she would visit France in May next year to attend, with the President of the French Republic, the ceremony to inaugurate the channel tunnel. The project has been talked about for more than 100 years. It took a Conservative Government, in co-operation with the French Government, to achieve the building of the channel tunnel, which will be open in May. I am very proud that that will happen and I know only too well that my constituency of Basildon will definitely benefit from the increasing trade activities resulting from the opening of the channel tunnel.

The past 18 months have been less than comfortable for the Government in terms of their relations with the electorate. The fact that we have had to spend so much of our time discussing the details of Maastricht, for example, has not been widely appreciated. When I knock on doors in my constituency, people do not say, "What are you doing about that particular protocol? What do you think about Maastricht generally? What is your view on subsidiarity?' There is no doubt that, while we discussed Maastricht, many members of the general public felt that we were not addressing the real problems they faced in their daily lives.

For that reason, I am pleased that the Gracious Speech meets the criticism levelled by so many of our people by setting out a legislative programme designed to benefit the whole country. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East (Mr. Atkinson) said, it is right that law and order are top of the agenda. Today in Basildon there is a district council by-election. Yesterday, I telephoned the home of one of my excellent councillors, Mrs. Carol Coombs, to wish the candidate who is seeking election the best of luck today. I found that Mrs. Coombs did not answer the telephone, but that two other ladies did. Those ladies happened to knock on the door, which was answered by a burglar. Of course, the ladies did not realise that the person was a burglar when the door was answered. He came out with some nonsense that he was doing some odd repairs.

When he was questioned further, he pushed the two ladies aside and ran off. That was at 3.30 in the afternoon. Basildon does not have a high crime record and performs much better than many other parts of the country. The two ladies told me that a young man was stationed in an alley around the corner from Mrs. Coombs' house. He was clearly positioned to indicate whether or not someone was going to knock on the door—obviously he failed in his duty. But the fact that the chap had the effrontery not even to feel anxious as he opened the door and pretended to be 102 engaged in domestic repairs sums up why it is right that the Government have seen law and order as the main part of the Gracious Speech today.

That being said, I congratulate the police on their recent successful drives against burglary and I support the improved powers for police enforcement. I totally support the initiatives of our most able Home Secretary, including the criminal justice Bill. I hope and believe that that Bill will be welcomed throughout the country.

The imbalance between criminals and their victims must be corrected. There is no doubt that the public feel that somehow the law is not working effectively and that crime is beginning to pay. People complain to me time after time that, while they are law-abiding citizens who pay their taxes, others are taking the mickey out of the system and are getting away with crime.

A broad understanding of why crimes are committed is a separate issue from the problem of protecting the overwhelming majority of law-abiding citizens from criminals who, on occasion, can be extremely dangerous. Daily media reports confirm that we seem to have been overwhelmed by terrible incidents.

What about real justice for innocent victims and their possessions? It is an insult for various politicians to suggest that a person who is unemployed is more likely to commit crime. History shows us that that is not the case and that it has never been the case. It is insulting to people who are out of work. The reasons for crime are much deeper and wider. Re-establishing the value of the family and of settled relationships will assist our efforts to combat crime.

I commend also the proposed measures against bail bandits for which I am sure there will be widespread support. Victims and the police will be heartened by the proposals to strengthen police powers in respect of illegal raves and gatherings of new age travellers.

Some of the serious crimes which have been reported recently are far less common than the daily theft of cars which are used for joyriding. What an absurd description for such a senseless activity, which results in death and injury to innocent people and in damage to property. That is quite unacceptable behaviour to the majority of people. I hope that the Government will prioritise that subject for legislation and then for enforcement.

I am glad that the Prime Minister and other Ministers have taken notice of the groundswell of public opinion on the increasing desirability of identity cards to defeat crime. Whether or not the system is run on a voluntary basis, as I suggested in a ten-minute Bill two months ago, I hope that the information to be held, the technology to be used, the cost and a score of other factors are being thoroughly investigated by the appropriate Departments.

We should be proud of the progress made in this country against football match violence and disturbances. I note what my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East (Mr. Atkinson) said. I am glad that the criminal justice Bill proposes that the unauthorised sale of football tickets on match days should become an offence. Many of us from both sides of the House would like to see some of the effective controls and systems in this country extended to other European countries.

I wish to praise The Times for this week highlighting the scope of drug availability in our schools. We must not blame the children; peer pressure is vicious and strong. I question whether, in some respects, parents and teachers could do more to prevent children from carrying out 103 criminal activities while under the influence of drugs and so protect vulnerable young people from serious and irreparable physical and mental damage. The difficulty of detecting drugs should not deter us from making a greater effort to eliminate that poisonous trade. We should all think seriously about our own responsibilities.

As for the Bill on Sunday trading, I believe that the subject is in great danger of becoming oversimplified. I remember the debate that we had on the subject in the House in 1986. I have strong and firm views on the issue which will no doubt be unpopular with a range of my constituents. At present I receive letters from constituents representing both sides of the argument. They state that if I do not support their view they will not vote for me in the next general election. We are striving valiantly to come out of an economic downturn and I cannot think of less of an incentive to have everyone trading seven days a week, which will produce extra costs of lighting, security and general management and which will ultimately reduce the overall profit level. The Conservative party has been wise to give Conservative Members a free vote on the subject.

I am becoming increasingly concerned about the so-called high street blight that is fuelled by some of our more aggressive large supermarket chains. I know what is said about jobs, but those chains could be destroying more jobs than they are creating. It is a difficult issue and we should give more attention to the way in which some of our hypermarkets are currently trading. I am alarmed because I believe that we are overtrading in Basildon, probably as a result of lax planning laws. I am delighted that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment has decided to be much firmer in planning matters in future.

In Basildon we have a wide range of retail outlets. I am proud that next year we shall begin the completion of covering our shopping centre. We shall then have the largest covered shopping centre in Europe. What about the little shops, the little trading centres that have been in the town since it was built in 1952? Those traders have been there for 30 years or more. They have invested in their trading activities. They have been supported by their families and have offered local residents an excellent service. All of a sudden, through laxity in planning laws, the whole pattern of trade is changing, with bigger stores and convenience foods. There is no way in which the small shopkeeper can possibly compete with some of the prices being offered at the hypermarkets at the moment. One has only to look at the huge advertisements that are being taken out now in our national newspapers to see that a price war is going on.

As a Conservative who supports a free market, I know that the consumer will initially benefit from that, but I worry greatly about the viability of the small shopkeeper. I hope that when hon. Members consider the question of Sunday trading, they will have regard to the impact that it might have on the small shopkeeper.

A further matter that increasingly concerns me is the way in which some of our hypermarkets, before they have even opened their stores, open a petrol station. The idea is that the petrol station offers cut-price petrol, normally at between 8p to 10p cheaper than the majority of petrol stations are able to offer it. Quite how they are able to do that I do not know, but I understand that, often, such petrol does not use detergents. Yes, it conforms to British 104 standards, but often petrol at the cut-price rate does not have any mix of detergents. As a result, engines deteriorate.

Over recent times garages have not offered a de-coke facility but, increasingly, unless the general public appreciate the matter of detergents, there will be a real issue about the quality of petrol that one buys. Of course, Conservatives believe in choice and encourage it, but consumers must always choose wisely. When supermarkets offer their cut-price petrol, I hope that they make it clear to consumers whether or not their petrol contains detergent.

I shall move on to the forthcoming Bill to set up the environment agencies. I shall be most interested to see how socialist-controlled Essex county council behaves in that regard. When I spoke in the summer Adjournment debate, I brought to the attention of the House the behaviour of that council since May. I wondered whether the House had the power to impeach a number of county councillors. From what I can see, since May they have clearly broken their election promises. We do not have the time to go into too much detail about the election promises that they have broken, but I shall mention some of them.

Before the election, county councillors tried to alarm my constituents and a wider population in Essex about Pitsea tip, which is where rubbish is dumped from London and surrounding areas. I should add that the dump was there long before I became the Member of Parliament for Basildon, and before my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East was the candidate there.

Since the county council elections in May, Essex county council has gone very quiet about Pitsea tip. It has been investigated by the Environment Select Committee. However, nothing has been said about closing Pitsea tip. I ask the House to consider why the socialists on Essex county council have gone quiet about the promises that they made before the May election to close that tip.

In its election literature, Essex county council said that it wanted to deliver nursery education to people throughout Essex. The council enunciated in great detail the value of nursery education. It was not so keen on playgroups. However, since May we have not heard a peep from the council about nursery education. The hypocrisy in terms of the council's broken promises was clearly demonstrated in a key vote in respect of which a further £4 million could have been spent on education. The Conservatives were in favour of the proposal, but the two socialist parties—Labour and the alliance—voted against it.

The biggest embarrassment for Essex county council involved the recent issue of literature on education. The council issued a glossy brochure in which it exhorted the Government to provide more money for the council to spend on education. In that glossy brochure, the council spelt government "goverment". The letter "n" was left out. What an embarrassment for socialist-controlled Essex county council. When I and others brought that spelling mistake to the council's attention, the leaflet was withdrawn and more money had to be spent on it. We in Essex will never forget how the socialists have already let us down since May.

I welcome the forthcoming deregulation Bill which will remove obstacles to contracting out in local and central government. Time after time, businesses in Basildon say to me, "We're struggling to make some sort of profit. We are weighed down with all the burdens and filling in forms when we employ only two, three or four people. When is 105 your Government going to do something about deregulation?" In our excellent Minister, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Corporate Affairs, I have great faith that we have just the man—as he demonstrated at the Conservative party conference—to do something about deregulation.

It is a shame that, against the constructive proposals in the Gracious Speech relating to the European Community, the two socialist parties in the House should continue to threaten employment prospects with their short-sighted adherence to the social charter and to European socialist manifestos which will adversely affect their own supporters. What a shambles it was when they gathered to launch the proposals on which they will fight the European elections.

Next June, there will be a clear choice for the country. The Conservative party wants us to be at the heart of Europe, but it will in no way sell out the interests of this country. We have now learnt that the two socialist parties in the House are prepared to sell this country down the river. We understand that their socialist plan is to have one Government and one currency. What is the good of any of us fighting the next general election to keep our seats in this place? The general public will have a real choice next June.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East referred to crime and said that the peak age for offending was 15. In Basildon over a weekend next June, a member of the royal family will open a festival of youth. Over two days, we will demonstrate all the wonderful qualities and achievements of young people. That will be a glorious celebration of the good side of so many of our young people.

I conclude by referring to the economy. Despite all the exhortations in the Gracious Speech, unless we have a sound economy, none of those goals can be achieved. I was delighted with the trade figures. Unemployment is down by 49,000, the biggest drop for four and a half years. In Basildon, there has been a further fall of 2.2 per cent. and 6.6 per cent. compared with June 1986. Yes, we all remember when the socialists had inflation up to 25 per cent. It has now fallen to 1.4 per cent. and it is the best figure for 25 years. We can be very proud of our economic performance. I have no doubt that our Budget on 30 November will assure the markets that we can finance the public sector borrowing requirement.