Business of the House

HC Deb 02 March 1995 vol 255 cc1203-14 4.41 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 statement about the business for next week.

MONDAY 6 MARCH—Second Reading of the Criminal Appeal Bill.

TUESDAY 7 MARCH—Opposition Day (9th allotted day). There will be a debate entitled "The Position of Women in Britain" on an Opposition motion.

WEDNESDAY 8 MARCH—Until 2.30 pm, there will be debates on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.

Until 7 o'clock, motion on the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989 (Continuance) Order.

Followed by a motion on the Appropriation (Northern Ireland) Order.

THURSDAY 9 MARCH—Until about 7 o'clock, proceedings on the South Africa Bill [Lords].

Followed by a motion to approve the first report of the Broadcasting Committee on developing the parliamentary broadcasting archives.

FRIDAY 10 MARCH—The House will not be sitting.

The House will also wish to know that European Standing Committee B will meet on Wednesday 8 March at 10.30 am to consider the unnumbered explanatory memorandum submitted by Her Majesty's Treasury on 23 November 1994 relating to the European Court of Auditors' annual report for the financial year 1993, together with replies from the institutions.

[Wednesday 8 March:

European Standing Committee B—Relevant European Community document: unnumbered, Report of the Court of Auditors for 1993; relevant report of the European Legislation Committee: HC 70-ii (1994–95).]

On Monday 13 March I anticipate proposing the Second Reading of the Gas Bill. I am still considering the exact pattern of business for the rest of the week, but the House may find it helpful to know that on Thursday 16 March I anticipate that Government business will be taken until 7 o'clock, and that that will be followed by a debate on a motion for the Adjournment.

Mrs. Ann Taylor (Dewsbury)

I thank the Leader of the House for that information. Who will speak for the Government in next Tuesday's debate, on the eve of International Women's Day, on the position of women in Britain?

The Leader of the House will, I hope, acknowledge that when the statement on Barings was made on Monday, the Chancellor was, understandably, unable to answer many questions because full information was not available. Will the right hon. Gentleman arrange for a statement to be made next week to give the House further information, specifically on the 43 pension funds that have been managed by Barings, including a proportion of the London Transport pension fund, about which many people must be worried, and on the charities whose assets are held by Barings and are now frozen? A specific statement on those issues would help many people.

The Leader of the House will be aware of the considerable interest, inside and outside the House, in the Prime Minister's apparent U-turn on executive pay. As Ministers do not appear to know whether they would support an amendment to the Finance Bill or to the Gas Bill a week on Monday, or indeed whether legislation is needed at all, and as the Greenbury committee may not report for some time, would it not be a good idea for the Government to initiate a debate in the House on executive pay and share options, so that the most effective way of tackling those abuses can be found and action taken as quickly as possible, not least because of the wide public concern? May we have a promise that such a debate will take place, or are we to assume that the Prime Minister's statement was merely hot air or window dressing?

The Government announced today that spending on higher education will increase next year by less than the rate of inflation. I am sure that the Leader of the House is aware that the vice-chancellor of Essex university criticised that decision today, and said that the future will be bleak if we do not invest in education.

My hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett) has issued figures today showing that cuts of about £320 million will be made in school budgets next year. When can we expect the Secretary of State for Education to explain to the House the freeze and squeeze in higher education and the dangers associated with the increase in class sizes, which is alarming parents, school governors and teachers alike? The Secretary of State for Education has not been to the Dispatch Box to defend her budgeting since she half promised to do so in the debate that was initiated by the Opposition.

Mr. Newton

I thought that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education made her position and her expectations and the position about funding absolutely clear in the debate to which the hon. Lady referred, but I will bring her remarks to the attention of my right hon. Friend.

On executive pay, again, as on a number of occasions during yesterday's debate, I wondered whether Opposition Members were listening to what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister was saying to them. I thought that he said straightforwardly that the Government would wish to consider the recommendations of the Greenbury committee, including anything that it might say about the need for legislation, and would then consider those matters at the appropriate time. I did not think that there was any room for misunderstanding about that, and I see no reason to respond to the hon. Lady in the positive way that I would normally seek to do.

The hon. Lady will be aware that my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor said that issues arising from Barings had been referred to the Board of Banking Supervision. On most of the issues, it would obviously be right to see what emerges from its inquiries, but I acknowledge that the hon. Lady has referred to a number of worrying matters that obviously need to be taken into account. I will bring those remarks to the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor.

Our participation in next Tuesday's debate is still under consideration, but I anticipate that at least one of the speeches will be made by my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton (Mrs. Browning), who recently became chairman of the Women's National Commission.

Sir Norman Fowler (Sutton Coldfield)

Will my right hon. Friend arrange for a Government statement or debate about housing renewal grants in Birmingham? Is he aware of the great public anxiety about that issue, that that concern will not he satisfied by an internal party investigation, that public money and the misuse of public money are at stake, and that what is needed is an independent investigation and an assurance that such abuse is not taking place anywhere else?

Mr. Newton

My right hon. Friend refers rightly to the need for an independent investigation, and I understand that the district auditor has followed the proper course and is investigating the allegations that have been made.

My right hon. Friend must also understand that I must be somewhat restrained in my comments about the matter. However, in one sense, the scale of the Leader of the Opposition's intervention and the implications of that action speak for themselves. In those circumstances, the Opposition might feel that it is an appropriate subject for discussion on their next Supply day.

Ms Liz Lynne (Rochdale)

Will the Leader of the House make time for an urgent debate on the plight of unpaid carers, especially in view of the report from SCOPE—formerly the Spastics Society—which found that many unpaid carers suffer grave financial hardship? Unpaid carers contribute a lot to this country, for which they have a right to be recognised.

Mr. Newton

The hon. Lady will know, I hope, that she is addressing a sympathetic ear. When I was a Minister at the Department of Social Security, I was responsible for extending the invalid care allowance to married women and for a number of other measures designed to recognise and underpin more clearly the position of unpaid carers. It is clear from everything that my right hon. and hon. Friends have done in the spheres of social security and health in recent times that they too are concerned about supporting unpaid carers and about recognising the contribution that they make.

Sir Ivan Lawrence (Burton)

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there has not been a full House of Commons debate on the Commonwealth since 1987? Since then, not only have we been joined by Namibia, Pakistan and South Africa, but a number of strains have developed within the Commonwealth—such as the Cyprus question—that must be addressed. Will my right hon. Friend choose the week beginning Monday 13 March—Commonwealth Day—for a debate on the subject of the Commonwealth?

Mr. Newton

There will be some opportunity to refer to such matters next Thursday, 9 March in the debate that I announced on the South Africa Bill. There is continuing uncertainty about the nature of business on Thursday, 16 March. In the circumstances, I clearly cannot make a commitment, but I will bear my hon. and learned Friend's suggestion in mind.

Mr. Tom Cox (Tooting)

Is the Leader of the House aware of the damning indictment of the district auditor, Mr. Rowland Little, of the behaviour of Wandsworth council in breaking the law for many years when rehousing homeless families in the borough? As the hon. Member for Croydon, Central (Sir P. Beresford), a junior Environment Minister, was chairman of that housing authority for three years, when can we expect a statement on his future?

Mr. Newton

The hon. Gentleman might have acknowledged that the auditor found no evidence of improper purpose or wilful misconduct, no evidence that the council took account of irrelevant considerations, no evidence of financial loss to the council and nothing to suggest that any council member or officer did not believe in the lawfulness of the council's actions.

Mr. Harry Greenway (Ealing, North)

May we have a debate next week on the effect of the action by the Channel 4 television programme "The Word" in paying for another trip by the 14-year-old boy who travelled to Malaysia using his father's passport and credit cards? That sets an extremely bad example to other young people. The boy's parents are apparently under contract to some news magazine and therefore cannot comment on or support that disgraceful decision.

Mr. Newton

I am sure that my hon. Friend's remarks will be studied carefully by those at whom they are directed. I will draw them to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for National Heritage.

Mr. Greville Janner (Leicester, West)

Is the Minister aware that yet another child has died as a result of choking on a pen top? Does he remember that my young constituent, Billy Walker, died in that way some time ago, as a result of which the Government introduced a trading standard? May we have a debate on the need to ban not merely unsafe pens produced in this country but those that are imported from overseas, to ensure that there are no more unnecessary deaths of this nature?

Mr. Newton

The safety of pen caps on sale in the United Kingdom—whether they are imported or manufactured locally—is covered by the General Product Safety Regulations 1994 and by a British standard requiring the ventilation of pen caps intended for children up to 14 years of age. Of course, contravention of those regulations is a criminal offence and local authority trading standards officers have the power to remove unsafe products from the market and to bring prosecutions. I am sure that the hon. and learned Gentleman will convey his concerns to the relevant authorities in Leicester, and I will also draw them to the attention of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

Mr. Harold Elletson (Blackpool, North)

Will the Leader of the House find time for a statement or a debate on the consultation paper on tourism that the Department of National Heritage issued this week? Does he agree that it emphasises the Government's commitment to the tourism industry and that it marks the beginning of a new drive for higher standards, quality and real value for money in tourism and leisure, which is Britain's fastest growing industry?

Mr. Newton

I am aware of the document that was published this week, which contains an action plan for a variety of bodies and which will assist the industry to take advantage of the opportunities that the growing market in tourism represents. I share my hon. Friend's hope that full advantage will be taken of those opportunities.

Mr. John McAllion (Dundee, East)

The Minister will be aware that yesterday the Government suffered a humiliating defeat in the Committee that considered the Local Government (Compensation for Redundancy or Premature Retirement on Reorganisation) (Scotland) Regulations 1995—the Government's inadequate compensation scheme for local government workers who were made redundant as a result of local government reorganisation in Scotland.

Technically, the Government can simply ignore that defeat because the statutory instrument was introduced under the negative resolution procedure. However, past Governments who have been defeated in that way have recognised their obligation to take account of the defeat by reintroducing the statutory instrument for further consideration by the whole House. Will the Minister assure hon. Members that he will continue that honourable tradition, recognise the fact that his Government have been defeated, and give the House a second chance to consider that important measure?

Mr. Newton

The only possible response to the hon. Gentleman is: nice try. As I understand it, the humiliation was the Opposition's. All but two Opposition Members on the Committee failed to turn up to debate the matter, and the rest magically arrived only just in time to vote when the debate had finished. I am sure that that brought joy to the heart of the shadow deputy Chief Whip, but others may make their own judgments.

I also understand that, during the last Labour Administration, a similar incident occurred on four occasions—which shows that my hon. Friends are just as good at their job as the shadow deputy Chief Whip is at his—none of which resulted in matters being referred back to the Floor of the House.

Sir Peter Emery (Honiton)

The whole House is pleased that my right hon. Friend has moved on the recommendations of the Procedure Committee and the Jopling Committee and has announced two weeks' business at the same time. He announced the business for Monday 13 March, when there will probably be a Division at 10 o'clock, and for Thursday 16 March, when there could be a Division at 7 o'clock, but he has left the 14th and the 15th blank. If possible, will he consider announcing what the business on particular days will be? If he has to adjust it later, the House will understand, but it would help hon. Members if my right hon. Friend could move in that direction.

Mr. Newton

I think that it is absolutely clear to everyone that I have been trying to move in that direction. I had hoped to move a little further today, but representations made to me led me to allow certain matters to be discussed further in accordance with the proper spirit of the usual channels.

Rev. Martin Smyth (Belfast, South)

May I support the hon. and learned Member for Burton (Sir I. Lawrence) in his plea for a debate on the Commonwealth? Can the Leader of the House help us in regard to Tuesday's debate, which is on an Opposition Supply day? Is there a particular problem affecting women in England and Wales that does not affect those in Scotland and Northern Ireland, or is it a secret acknowledgement that the Labour party is supporting the independence of Scotland and Northern Ireland?

Mr. Newton

This is one of the occasions when I think that the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) should be able to reply to questions. I am not sure whether she has even heard this one. I wonder whether the hon. Member for Birmingham, Perry Barr (Mr. Rooker) might draw her attention to the fact that a question has just been asked that is really for her and not for me. It related to why next Tuesday's debate is concerned only with the position of women in Britain, which has obviously caused some affront in Northern Ireland. I am not responsible for the debate or for its title. The hon. Gentleman's question, which is a fascinating one, should be directed to the hon. Lady.

Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham)

May we have a debate on youth provision, so that we can consider the decision of Labour-controlled Avon county council to cut its grants to the Avon Scout Association, the Boy's Brigade and to many other groups within the county, most of which are uniformed groups of youths? Perhaps we can contrast the fact that it is cutting grants to youth groups, yet introducing a grant to an organisation known as "Bristol Young Lesbian and Bisexual Women's Group". Why is Avon county council unable to fund proper youth organisations, but only loony-left nonsense?

Mr. Newton

You, Madam Speaker, will perhaps understand that, in anticipating a question from my hon. Friend, I had prepared for every possible question about Kent but not for a question about Avon.

Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)

May we have a debate on football and the plight of football supporters? No one in the House will support hooliganism, but at the Bruges v. Chelsea match, many respectable and decent British citizens found themselves subject to some heavy police activity and prevented from going to the match. The House should condemn hooliganism but stand up for decent people who are badly treated at football matches at home and abroad. May we have a debate on the matter?

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)

It is a pity that they did not lock up the Prime Minister and the right hon. and learned Member for Putney (Mr. Mellor) as well.

Mr. Newton

I am not surprised that the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) should be trying to divert attention. Just two weeks ago, in response to something that happened in Ireland, he was demanding more heavy-handed action than appeared to have taken place.

Mr. Skinner

No, I did not.

Mr. Newton

Perhaps that shows the difficulty of getting the balance right. Two weeks ago, everybody was asking, "Why has somebody not done more?" Today, someone is asking, "Why has somebody done so much?" It is an inherently difficult problem and we should acknowledge that.

Mr. Anthony Coombs (Wyre Forest)

May we have a debate next week on local government to bring to the attention of the House the latest sad example of incompetence and waste by Labour-controlled Birmingham city council? I refer, in particular, to its intention to pursue a legal action against Sutton Coldfield college of further education and the College of Food from Birmingham. A lower court recently found that Birmingham city council had illegally transferred £13.6 million, which was intended for those colleges for training purposes, to prestige projects in the city. As legal action so far has cost about £200,000 and interest on the bill is £2,000 a week, is it not a matter for the district auditor?

Mr. Newton

I am not sure whether it would be a matter for the district auditor, who appears to have a growing amount on his plate from Birmingham, but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education might wish to consider what my hon. Friend has described, especially in view of some of the observations at the start of business questions on the funding of further and higher education.

Madam Speaker

Business questions are getting long and convoluted and we have other business to conduct this afternoon and evening. I shall do my best to call hon. Members, but will they please ask brisk questions? I am sure that the Leader of the House will give brisk answers.

Mr. John Denham (Southampton, Itchen)

May I remind the Leader of the House that a year ago I introduced a private Member's Bill designed to relieve the problems of council leaseholders who cannot sell their flats and who face huge bills? At the time, faced with a huge public lobby, the Government promised action; a year later, there has been no action. May we have a debate on the problems faced by council leaders and a promise of action that will be followed up by the Government?

Mr. Newton

The hon. Gentleman may have an opportunity to put that very question to the Secretary of State for the Environment, if he feels it appropriate, on Wednesday 15 March.

Mr. George Galloway (Glasgow, Hillhead)

May I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to early-day motion 582?

[That this House is gravely concerned at the unsolved murder, in a British military barracks in Germany, of Christina Menzies the 16 year old daughter of Staff Sergeant John Menzies and his wife Christine; is concerned at reports of poor police work by the Military Police investigating the murder and poor legal work by the Military Police Prosecutor; and, in the light of the acquittal of the accused, Corporal Fisher, and the statement by the Military Police that they were no longer looking for any other suspect, asks the obvious question whether the murderer of Christina Menzies is still at large within the British armed forces.]

It deals with the bungling by the military police and the incompetence of the military prosecuting authorities who investigated the murder of my constituent, Christina Menzies. As a result of that bungling and incompetence, Corporal Darren Fisher, who killed my constituent, has literally got away with murder and is currently at large in a military establishment in Telford, Shropshire. Does the Leader of the House understand that British military justice and law is increasingly seen as an ass and many cases and issues are now backing up? We urgently need a debate, so that the system of courts martial and the way in which justice is dispensed in the armed forces, especially when crimes are committed against civilians, as in my constituent's case, can be brought under democratic control and modernised so that police and prosecuting work is up to standard, as it should be.

Mr. Newton

I shall obviously bring those remarks to the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence, but I understand that the prosecuting officer in the case was a qualified lawyer who had experience of prosecuting charges of unlawful killing.

Mr. Cynog Dafis (Ceredigion and Pembroke, North)

Will the Leader of the House arrange for a debate on the first conference on the climate change convention, which will be held towards the end of March, particularly in view of increasing anxiety and alarm and the accumulating evidence that global warming is occurring? Will he arrange for the Government to make a statement on how they plan to achieve carbon dioxide emission reductions by the end of the century and introduce further targets for reductions as soon as possible?

Mr. Newton

Those matters are under consideration at present, in relation not just to the conference in Berlin at the end of the month but to the Council of Environment Ministers next week. I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment will make the British Government's position clear as and when it is appropriate.

Mr. Jimmy Wray (Glasgow, Provan)

Will the Leader of the House find time to debate the alarming boom in the economy of Colombia as 70 per cent. of its gross national product comes from the growth of coke, which has expanded from 1,000 hectares to 200,000 hectares in a very short time? That expansion has manifested itself in drug abuse and drug-related crime throughout Europe and the United Kingdom.

Mr. Newton

I think that the right course would be for me to ensure that my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is made aware of the hon. Gentleman's remarks. As chairman of the Government's committee on drug misuse, I attach great importance to anything that can be done in Britain or abroad to reduce both the demand and the supply of drugs.

Mr. David Jamieson (Plymouth, Devonport)

Has the Leader of the House seen the article in today's edition of Today, quoting Judge Stephen Tumim saying that Derek Lewis was not the first choice as director general of Her Majesty's prisons, but was appointed because of his support for the privatisation of prisons? May we expect a statement next week from the Home Secretary on why the recommendations of the interviewing panel were turned down and why we did not have the best person for the job?

Mr. Newton

I must simply repeat what was said previously. The appointment of the director general was approved by the civil service commissioners in the normal way. Three candidates were assessed as being of an acceptable standard. They were then interviewed by the then Home Secretary and the board then reconvened.

Ms Glenda Jackson (Hampstead and Highgate)

The Leader of the House will recall the Prime Minister's confirmation during Tuesday's Question Time that automatic train protection is being reconsidered. As the Government have given an absolute commitment to the installation of automatic train protection throughout the entire British Rail network for the past six years, will he ensure that there is a statement, or preferably a debate, on the matter, so that we can examine why the Government are reneging on yet another promise that impacts so strongly on the safety of the travelling public?

Mr. Newton

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport is considering advice from the Health and Safety Commission and from Railtrack on British Rail's report on automatic train protection. An announcement will be made in due course and that would be the appropriate time at which to consider a debate.

Mr. Peter Hain (Neath)

May I press the Leader of the House again for a statement on the district auditor's report on Wandsworth council? The right hon. Gentleman failed to mention in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox) that in paragraph 6.9 the district auditor specifically states that the council had acted unlawfully in selling thousands of empty properties to Tory supporters and putting homeless families on the streets. How can the Minister with responsibility for housing in London remain in office when as leader of Wandsworth council he was responsible for that policy and escaped surcharge by the skin of his teeth? He must go, or is law breaking penetrating the heart of the Government?

Mr. Newton

I will not repeat what I said in my earlier answer. In the light of what I have already said, any suggestion that my hon. Friend should resign is quite nonsensical.

Mr. Michael Connarty (Falkirk, East)

Will the Leader of the House arrange for the Secretaries of State for the various parts of the United Kingdom to make statements on the progress of clinical trials of beta interferon to treat some of the more virulent symptoms of multiple sclerosis? When I raised this matter before on behalf of my constituent, Kenneth Deering, I was promised that clinical trials would start, but my studies have shown that there seems to be sporadic individual prescription for beta interferon in one of its four forms to people who have multiple sclerosis. However, there is no indication of progress towards clinical trials that will allow it to be prescribed to the thousands of multiple sclerosis sufferers who are waiting for it to be made available.

Mr. Newton

As the quite active president of my local MS society, I certainly share the hon. Gentleman's interest in this matter. I shall bring his remarks to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health.

Mr. Derek Enright (Hemsworth)

Is the Leader of the House aware that it is said that the six members of the Greenbury committee earn more than £4 million between them? Will he ask the Prime Minister to look urgently into that, set up an inquiry, and report back to the House?

Mr. Newton

I shall not add to what I said earlier. I do not accept the suggestion that members of the Greenbury committee are incapable of looking seriously and objectively at serious public issues.

Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North)

The Leader of the House must be aware that three times this week hon. Members have raised the question of the treatment of Sita Kamara, an asylum seeker in this country. Hon. Members make daily representations to the Home Office about the conditions under which asylum seekers are kept and about the fact that more than 700 are currently in custody in detention centres and prisons in this country. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is necessary for the House to be able to debate the whole question of the treatment of asylum seekers, the refusal of asylum and the plight that those who are forcibly deported from this country face when they go back to the country from which they tried to flee in the first place?

Mr. Newton

As the hon. Gentleman says, the matter has been raised on a number of occasions. I have no doubt that a number of responses have been given and I certainly do not intend to add further to those.

Mr. Harry Barnes (Derbyshire, North-East)

After tomorrow's business, two private Members' Bills are likely to be presented to the House. They are highly significant and have wide support in the House and throughout the country. They are the Wild Mammals (Protection) Bill and the Civil Rights (Disabled Persons) Bill. Given that support, should there not at least be discussions through the usual channels with the Leader of the House to see whether a second Committee can be set up to deal with private Members' Bills? They are not pushed for Government business and we need to make progress in the two areas covered by the Bills in accordance with the will of the House.

Mr. Newton

I realise that it will disappoint the hon. Gentleman when I tell him that I have no plans for changing the ordinary arrangements for dealing with private Members' Bills, which have applied for many years.

Mr. Kevin Barron (Rother Valley)

Will the Leader of the House ask the Secretary of State for Employment to make a statement next week about an allegation in a newspaper today that the Department of Employment intends to withdraw one of the calculations of regional unemployment on the basis that it shows higher, more truthful unemployment than the calculation that it is proposed to replace?

Mr. Newton

My right hon. Friend will be here to answer questions on Tuesday and I shall give him advance notice of that one.

Mr. Tom Clarke (Monklands, West)

Is the Leader of the House aware that his reassuring reply to the hon. Member for Rochdale (Ms Lynne) on the SCOPE report on carers and his reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire, North-East (Mr. Barnes) are not consistent? Does he accept that the procedures of the House for private Members' Bills, to which he has just referred, were quite disgracefully abused last year by Conservative Members? In an effort to bring some sanity back to the situation, will he agree to allow appropriate time to the Government Bill on disability, which has just left Committee and which is based on reasonable exchanges on both sides? If necessary, will he grant two days for discussion, and ensure that the Bill presented by my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire, North-East, which did not have one vote against its Second Reading, and the Bill to be introduced tomorrow by my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, North-West (Mr. Wicks), will be given sufficient parliamentary time for reasonable debate? If that does not happen, the House will continue to be held in disrepute.

Mr. Newton

I cannot add to what I said to the hon. Member for Derbyshire, North-East (Mr. Barnes) in respect of procedures generally. The first part of the hon. Gentleman's question implies that he expects the Government to adopt an unconstructive approach to the Bill to be presented by the hon. Member for Croydon, North-West (Mr. Wicks). Perhaps he will examine with care what my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State will say if he gets the opportunity tomorrow.

Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West)

When may we have a debate on early-day motion 685?

[That this House calls for St. David's Day to be declared a bank holiday in Wales; notes that no other country in the British Isles or the European Union in 1995 will have fewer holidays than Wales (and England); congratulates the seven cities in the USA that will declare St. David's Day a special holiday; and believes that the ancient and popular celebrations of the Welsh national day should be honoured and elevated to the full status of a public holiday.]

The motion calls for St. David's day to be made a bank holiday in Wales and states that Wales has fewer holidays than almost every country in the British Isles and the European Union. Has the right hon. Gentleman noticed that the early-day motion has been signed by 30 Welsh Members, which represents more than 90 per cent. of Welsh Members who are eligible to sign early-day motions? Is he not concerned that yesterday the Prime Minister in a one-word reply said that he would not act on this call from democratically elected Welsh Members? Is not that a contemptible way to treat the elected representatives of the Welsh nation?

Mr. Newton

I am afraid that I do not agree that it is. If we were to accede to the request and if that was followed by a request for Parliament to have a day off in consequence, which seems to be the natural concomitant, the hon. Gentleman would find himself in conflict with his hon. Friends the Members for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) and for Derbyshire, North-East (Mr. Barnes).