HC Deb 18 October 1993 vol 230 cc21-3 3.31 pm
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton)

With permission, I should like to make a short business statement about revised business for Wednesday 20 October.

The business for that day will now be: consideration of Lords amendments to the National Lottery etc.Bill.

Business for the remainder of the week will remain as announced.

Several hon. Members

rose—

Madam Speaker

Before the House begins questions, I remind all hon. Members that this is a very narrow statement, relating only to the change of business for one day. Questions should therefore be related to the change of Wednesday's business and to seeking clarification about that.

Mrs. Margaret Beckett (Derby, South)

Will the Leader of the House clarify whether it is the intention to reschedule Wednesday's business in the near future? Given the debate taking place in the country and in the press on issues such as the level of crime and the consequences of the Government's lack of an energy policy, I hope that he can find time for that.

Madam Speaker

Order. I gave hon. Members a good indication of what the question was about, and I hope that they will heed that.

Mr. Newton

As the day in question is an Opposition Day, the right hon. Lady may have been suggesting the subjects for it that she has in mind, and I am duly grateful for that. As for whether she will get an Opposition day before too long, I would not expect her to wait beyond next week.

Mr. Harry Greenway (Ealing, North)

Having rearranged the business for next Wednesday, can my right hon. Friend squeeze into that day a debate on the decision on women priests, in view of the concern in the country about this subject?

Mr. Newton

I do not know whether I can "squeeze in" that matter on Wednesday, but I do hope to be able to find time for it before too long.

Mr. Simon Hughes (Southwark and Bermondsey)

The Leader of the House has been kind enough to say that he has pulled Opposition business for this week. He is usually keen to let us know with as much notice as possible when debates will take place, so can he tell us now when Opposition business will be discussed before the end of term—and all other dates that will be helpful to planning?

Mr. Newton

That was a good try. The hon. Gentleman is kind to say how helpful I try to be. I can give him a little help: I do not expect him to have to wait much longer than the right hon. Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett) for the day that he wants.

Sir Teddy Taylor (Southend, East)

As the rearrangement of Wednesday's business gives us an opportunity to consider the national lottery, can the Leader of the House say whether the Secretary of State will be able to tell us whether the lottery will still be viable, given the additional social chapter regulations which the Government agreed on Tuesday—regulations which we were told during the Maastricht debate and at the party conference would add enormously to the costs of industry?

Will the Secretary of State be able to say what the additional costs for British industry and the lottery of these astonishing proposals will be? We had understood that the Government were going to block or endeavour to veto them; instead, with the help of my hon. Friend the Member for Stirling (Mr. Forsyth), they let them through without a fight.

Mr. Newton

Collectively, the House had obviously come back in what can only be described as an ingenious frame of mind. I am not sure whether the Minister will have a great report to make on that matter, but I shall draw to his attention the fact that my hon. Friend will expect one.

Mr. Boby Cryer (Bradford, South)

Will Wednesday's business go on after 10 o'clock, and will there be a resolution to permit that? There is no doubt that the National Lottery etc. Bill was unsatisfactorily drafted and has given rise to a great deal of debate and argument about the allocation of the moneys. For example, there has been no explanation about the allocation to the film industry, and members of that industry and the British Film Institute are highly dissatisfied about allocation through the Arts Council.

In view of that, we should have a good amount of time to debate the legislation and, even though we shall be debating Lords amendments, there should be no attempt to get it through by 10 o'clock. The House should have sufficient time to go into the matter in some detail.

Mr. Newton

I anticipate that the arrangements for this matter will provide adequate time. I shall draw to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for National Heritage the fact that, if he can provide a satisfactory answer for the hon. Gentleman, the time will be shorter than would otherwise be required.

Mr. Peter Thurnham (Bolton, North-East)

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, when there is an Opposition debate, it would be a good idea to have it about housing, in view of the latest local government—

Madam Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman will resume his seat. That is a good question for Thursday's business, but it is not a question for today.

Mr. Martin Redmond (Don Valley)

Could the Leader of the House explain why he has selected that business for Wednesday in view of all the problems in the country, such as those in the coal industry?

Mr. Newton

The obvious reason for choosing that business for Wednesday is that we wish to get the National Lottery etc. Bill through so that it can provide assistance to a wide range of good causes.

Mr. Geoffrey Dickens (Littleborough and Saddleworth)

As the National Lottery etc. Bill is designed to benefit the arts and sport, may we be assured that, on Wednesday, it will be universally supported in the House so that the legislation will be quickly dispatched and money can be given to the arts and sport?

Mr. Newton

I take that as an exhortation to those such as the hon. Member for Don Valley (Mr. Redmond), and I hope that they will heed my hon. Friend's wise words.

Dr. Norman A. Godman (Greenock and Port Glasgow)

Could Wednesday's business be delayed, if only for a few minutes, to allow the Secretary of State for Scotland to make a statement on the report of the inquiry—

Madam Speaker

Order. That is a good try, and if the hon. Gentleman catches my eye on Thursday I might allow him to put it then. However, it is not in order today.

Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)

Does the alteration of Wednesday's business mean that this Session will end any sooner? We have been back for just over an hour and people would like to know when the Session is to end.

Mr. Newton

I dare say they would. I shall be in a better position to answer that question when we have judged the mood in which the House has returned for the spillover.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)

Does the Leader of the House recognise that the coal industry has been the subject of a lottery for the past 12 months?

Madam Speaker

Order. I gave the hon. Gentleman a clear indication of the statement's limit. He knows the rules of the House, and I am sure that he will come to the point right away.

Mr. Skinner

Will he agree to a special clause in the National Lottery etc. Bill so that we can argue the coal industry's case? That case went by default because the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry was more concerned about saving his job than the jobs of the 30,000 miners.

Mr. Newton

If I have understood the question aright, the answer is no.

Forward to