HC Deb 15 February 1996 vol 271 cc1164-71 5.14 pm
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton)

With permission, I shall make a statement on forthcoming business.

MONDAY 19 FEBRUARY—Remaining stages of the Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Bill.

Motion on the Appropriation (Northern Ireland) Order.

TUESDAY 20 FEBRUARY—Motions on the Child Support (Maintenance Assessments and Special Cases) and Social Security (Claims and Payments) Amendment Regulations, the Guaranteed Minimum Pensions Increase Order, the Social Security Benefits Up-rating Order, the Social Security (Contributions) Amendment Regulations, the Social Security (Contributions) (Re-rating and National Insurance Fund Payments) Order and the Social Security (Incapacity for Work) (General) Amendment Regulations.

WEDNESDAY 21 FEBRUARY—Until 2 pm, there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.

Progress on remaining stages of the Asylum and Immigration Bill.

THURSDAY 22 FEBRUARY—Until about 7 o'clock, conclusion of remaining stages of the Asylum and Immigration Bill.

FRIDAY 23 FEBRUARY—The House will not be Sitting.

MONDAY 26 FEBRUARY—Debate on the Scott report, on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.

I am not yet in a position to be specific about the subsequent three days, other than to say that I expect to take Government business, and hope also to provide some Opposition time. On Friday 1 March, the business will be private Members' Bills.

Mrs. Ann Taylor (Dewsbury)

I thank the Leader of the House for that information, and for taking on board our representations that the Asylum and Immigration Bill should have an extra half day for its remaining stages.

I turn first to the Scott report, because we have just heard a very important statement—everyone must agree with that. Will any of the Ministers who have been criticised in the report be making a personal statement next week, and are the Government prepared to reconsider their decision that the debate on the 26th should be on a motion for the Adjournment? Why are the Government not prepared to table a substantive motion that could be amendable, so that the House could have the opportunity to have a clear vote on many of the issues contained in the report? Will the Leader of the House tell us, today, who will be speaking in that debate, and which Ministers will be facing the House to answer further questions?

May I also repeat my regular question about the timing of the White Paper on the intergovernmental conference? In recent weeks, hon. Members have pressed the Lord President about that matter many times, and he has said that he will answer at some future stage. We have still not had an answer, and I think that that information would be of interest to hon. Members.

When do the Government intend to move the writ for the by-election in South-East Staffordshire? The Leader of the House will be aware that efforts are usually made to fill vacancies within three months. He will also be aware that all the main political parties have their candidates in place, that the register is available, and that it has been published. To keep within the three-month agreement, I think that the writ will have to be moved next week. Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether it will be, or are the Government afraid of that by-election?

Mr. Newton

I express my gratitude once again for the hon. Lady's reference to the modification of the business that has been made in response to the entirely reasonable representations that have been made through the usual channels.

I am not aware of plans for any Minister to make a personal statement on the Scott report next week. I think that a debate on the Adjournment is much the most appropriate way to debate such a wide-ranging report. The Ministers who will take part in the debate, I expect, will be the President of the Board of Trade and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

In relation to the IGC White Paper, the hon. Lady is wrong to suggest that I said that I would shortly be giving the House a date. I think that I said that the White Paper will be published in good time before the IGC, but I shall of course let the hon. Lady know as soon as I am in a position to give a date.

As for the writ for South-East Staffordshire by-election, the hon. Lady will know that that is not a matter for me. I shall, however, bring her comments to the attention of those concerned.

Mr. John Marshall (Hendon, South)

Will my right hon. Friend arrange for an urgent early debate on the economic situation, so that we can point out that unemployment is still falling—it is now 7.9 per cent.—that inflation is low and falling, that this is all due to the Government's policies, and that our economy is very much stronger than those of western European countries which follow the policies advocated by the Opposition?

Mr. Newton

What an excellent question; I could not have put it better myself.

Mr. Gerry Sutcliffe (Bradford, South)

Will the Leader of the House ask the Secretary of State for the Environment to make a statement on the collapse of the Government's social housing programme? This morning, housing associations—the vehicle that the Government are now using to create social housing in place of local authorities—have had their private finance stopped because of the inadequacy of the Housing Bill. Will the Leader of the House ask his right hon. Friend to make a statement to put the matter right?

Mr. Newton

Were the hon. Gentleman's forecast accurate, I am sure that my right hon. Friend would wish to make the position clear. I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's description of the position, but I shall draw his comments to my right hon. Friend's attention.

Sir Irvine Patnick (Sheffield, Hallam)

Will my right hon. Friend arrange an early debate to discuss the resolution passed by Labour-controlled Sheffield city council on 31 January, which has been sent to the Secretary of State for Education and all Members of Parliament for Sheffield? In it, the council condemns the hypocrisy of senior Labour politicians in seeking privileges for their children in contradiction of their own stated educated policy.

Mr. Newton

That sounds rather a good subject for a debate, along with many others I can think of. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his suggestion.

Mr. Archy Kirkwood (Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

Is the Leader of the House aware of the dramatic increase in the number of complaints being received from all parts of rural United Kingdom about the tangible effects of low-flying training? Will he arrange for a debate in Government time on this subject and, in particular, on the Ministry of Defence's restitution of compensation in cases where property is dislocated and destroyed, and where loss of life is a direct consequence of low-flying training?

Mr. Newton

I am aware of such concerns. Indeed, one or two have been expressed in my constituency. I shall, of course, bring the hon. Gentleman's remarks to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence. I should add that, inevitably, a balance has to be struck. This afternoon, we have been talking about Iraq. Our planes made such a contribution to the war there that we could not have failed to carry out the relevant flying training exercises.

Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham)

Will my right hon. Friend arrange for a debate next week on the briefing of the press in this place? We heard in the statement about briefing against members of the Government which suggested dishonourable and scurrilous behaviour, but I draw my right hon. Friend's attention to early-day motion 421, which shows that briefing has occurred, but, in this case, by the deputy Leader of the Opposition against his own leader.

Mr. Newton

I am not in a position to add to what my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade said on this and other matters, but I hope that my hon. Friend's comments will be carefully considered by the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook)—and, indeed, by the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott).

Mr. Alfred Morris (Manchester, Wythenshawe)

In the light of the evidence that he has heard and seen here today, does the Leader of the House really think that a single day is long enough for the debate on the Scott report?

Mr. Newton

I have already said that a debate on the Adjournment is appropriate. I also think that the proposal for a day's debate on the Adjournment is appropriate.

Mr. Greville Janner (Leicester, West)

As it is such a long time since the House debated health and safety, will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to arrange a debate focusing in particular on the safety of children and young people in parks? I ask this because of the pollution of a stream running through Braunstone park in my constituency, which resulted in a number of young people being injured and burnt, and the destruction of thousands of fish. It is the sort of problem that afflicts people across the country, and I think that a debate would be appropriate.

Mr. Newton

The hon. and learned Gentleman knows that the Government are concerned to improve the protection of the environment and of people, and that they have taken action to that end. It sounds an appropriate subject for a Wednesday morning debate; perhaps the hon. and learned Gentleman might like to bid for a such a debate.

Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's announcement of a debate on the Scott report, does he agree that the way in which the arrangements were made for the report to be seen makes a mockery of parliamentary accountability, and that he, as Leader of the House, must be accused of showing contempt for Parliament in not persuading the Government to act otherwise? It is disgraceful that hon. Members were given only 10 minutes, or probably less, to read a five-volume report. Once again, the Government have shown contempt for our procedures.

Mr. Newton

I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's strictures. Perhaps it may be of some comfort to him to know that I did not receive a copy of the report until 3.30 pm.

Ms Glenda Jackson Hampstead and Highgate)

May we have an early debate on the grievous effect of the Government's noxious habitual residence test and its impact on British citizen and United Kingdom nationals? Is the Leader of the House aware that the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux this week published a report entitled "Failing the Test", which shows that, far from catching benefit tourists, as the Secretary of State for Social Security claimed, the test is targeting more than 38,000 British citizens and UK nationals? As appeals against the test can take anything up to three months, many British citizens and UK nationals are living in their own country without any means of financial support. That is a grievous situation, and we should have an early debate on it.

Mr. Newton

There will, of course, be a number of social security debates next week, but I shall draw the hon. Lady's remarks to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security. In introducing the test, the Government were responding to criticism of the easy access to income support for anyone who chose to come to this country. Experience has shown that abuse was substantially greater even than had been estimated, which originally caused the concern. There are certainly no plans to withdraw the test.

Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire)

The weather has improved, but may we have a debate on cold weather payments, as a number of people have missed out on them and been placed in very difficult circumstances? Even under the current rules, the temperature is often measured miles from where the problem is. Clay Cross in my constituency is almost 50 miles from Leeds, but Leeds is the centre where the relevant measurement is taken.

However, there were probably at least two weeks in January, when, had the temperature properly been measured in north Derbyshire, people in Clay Cross and the surrounding areas would have received cold weather payments.

Mr. Newton

I shall ask my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security to examine the matter, but I know from experience that the scheme is a great deal quicker, more effective and sensitive than it was not so many years ago.

Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)

May we have a debate on commercial lobbying? Does the Leader of the House think it right in principle that a Minister of the Crown should sign a renewal application for a pass for a commercial lobbyist, and that a pass to the House should then be issued? Surely there is a principle involved.

Mr. Newton

Madam Speaker, I understand that my hon. Friend to whom the hon. Gentleman refers has written to you about the matter, and I do not think that I should make any further comment from the Dispatch Box now.

Mr. Win Griffiths (Bridgend)

Is the Leader of the House aware that the local government boundary commission for Wales gave the Secretary of State for Wales its proposals today to deal with anomalies in the border around the town of Bridgend? Because of the way in which the matter is being dealt with, there is a danger that, if the Secretary of State does not allow the proposal to be publicised tomorrow for a period of six weeks, the boundary changes will not come into effect for a full year after the local government reorganisation has taken place.

Great concern has been expressed in my constituency about the impact of this, and I would appreciate it if the Leader of the House could use his good offices to secure a debate on behalf of my constituents. Clearly, I am using mine, but I realise that his probably have a greater pull in this respect.

Mr. Newton

I had not been aware of that report or proposal, but I am now. I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales is aware of them both, and I must point out that he is due to answer questions here next Monday.

Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North)

The Leader of the House is probably aware that next week is half-term holiday throughout most of the country, and that on Monday, the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith), speaking on behalf of the House of Commons Commission, revealed to the House that the Commission has no plans to introduce any kind of child care facility in this building for the children of Members or of staff, other than the £6-a-day allowance for private nursery places to which some staff are entitled.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that it might be an idea at least to consider the problems of many people who have young children yet who also want to be in the House, and so need some child care facility? Just before the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century, might not this building catch up with the times by introducing a practice that is fairly normal in large institutions, and providing a workplace child care facility, so that all people, whether Members or people employed here, could participate equally in the proceedings in this building?

Madam Speaker

Do I understand that the hon. Gentleman seeks a debate on such matters—or simply an opinion?

Mr. Corbyn

Of course, Madam Speaker, it would be helpful if the children could come and take part in the debate. They might bring some sense of reality to our proceedings, which is clearly missing, judging by what is happening today.

Madam Speaker

I am simply reminding the House that this is an occasion on which we ask for debates.

Mr. Newton

You may also think it right to remind the House, Madam Speaker, that such matters are for the House of Commons Commission, of which you are the Chairman, and for which the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed speaks.

Mr. Corbyn

You are the Leader of the House.

Mr. Newton

And I am a member of the Commission—and I have played a part in bringing about the improvement in provision to which the hon. Gentleman referred, by introducing the arrangements he mentioned. I shall ensure that the Chairman of the Commission has her attention drawn to his remarks.

Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)

Gratified though I am to have a walk-on part in the Scott report, may I ask for a debate next week about the streets of London? I realise that the Leader of the House rarely walks the streets of London, surrounded as he is by his fawning civil servants, but if he were to do so, he might see that they are being turned into patchwork quilts by being constantly dug up by deregulated operators, especially the cable companies, who leave them in the most appalling state. That is the sort of thing that really gets up the noses of the people I represent in the east end of London, and I should like the opportunity of a debate, so that I can tell the right hon. Gentleman in far more detail exactly what is going on.

Mr. Newton

I mildly observe that I do occasionally walk the streets of London, usually when accompanying my wife on a shopping expedition. [HON. MEMBERS: "Sexist."] I do not think that there is anything sexist in that. It is an entirely proper thing for a husband to do—and probably a wise one as well. [Interruption.] This is going to cause trouble when the news gets back home.

Various efforts have been made in recent years to achieve better co-ordination when streets have to be dug up, but I accept that the hon. Gentleman thinks that we have not yet reached perfection, and I shall draw his remarks to the attention of those concerned.

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

May I impress upon the Leader of the House the urgent need for an early debate both on the whole of Senator Mitchell's report and on the infamous decision and action of the IRA in returning to bombing innocent citizens? May I remind the right hon. Gentleman that Senator Mitchell and his esteemed colleagues argued that there was a need for meaningful negotiations, which they hoped would lead to comprehensive change in Northern Ireland? Surely that laudable objective could be helped in a realistic way if all-party talks, to include Sinn Fein, were to take place in the near future.

Mr. Newton

I accept unequivocally that the hon. Gentleman's request for a debate is serious. I think that he will also recognise, as will the occupants of both Front Benches and the spokesmen for the minority parties, that no one would want to do anything, whether in the House or elsewhere, that did not seem clearly to contribute to the prospects of the peace that we all want to see. In that context, I shall bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman said and bring it to the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.