Business of the House (Hansard, 26 November 1998)

§ Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire)
May I ask the Leader of the House to give us the business for next week?

§ The President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mrs. Margaret Beckett)
As the House is aware, the Debate on the Address in reply to the Gracious Speech will be brought to a conclusion on Tuesday 1 December.
The business following the conclusion of the Debate on the Humble Address will be as follows:
WEDNESDAY 2 DECEMBER—Until 2 o'clock, there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Consideration of allocation of time motion relating to the European Parliamentary Elections Bill.
Proceedings on the European Parliamentary Elections Bill.
THURSDAY 3 DECEMBER—Debate on the European Union on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
FRIDAY 4 DECEMBER—The House will not be sitting.
The provisional business for the following week will be as follows:
MONDAY 7 DECEMBER—Second Reading of the Water Industry Bill.
TUESDAY 8 DECEMBER—Second Reading of the Road Traffic (NHS charges) Bill.
WEDNESDAY 9 DECEMBER—Until 2 o'clock there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Opposition Day [1st Allotted Day]
There will be a debate on an Opposition motion, subject to be announced.
THURSDAY 10 DECEMBER—Estimates Day [1st Allotted Day]
There will be a debate on prison sentences and alternatives to prison sentences. Followed by a debate on New Deal Pathfinders and Pathways into Work for Lone Parents. Details will be given in the Official Report.
At 10 o'clock the House will be asked to agree the winter supplementary estimates, the votes on account and supplementary defence votes.
FRIDAY 11 DECEMBER—The House will not be sitting.

§ Sir George Young
The House is grateful for next week's business and for an indication of the business for the week after. Can the right hon. Lady confirm that, very shortly, there will be a statement on the local government revenue support grant? Can she possibly tell the House the date when that is expected?
On General Pinochet, we understand your ruling, Madam Speaker, that this matter is sub judice. However, if the Home Secretary exercises his discretion, and it is no longer sub judice, can she confirm that the Home Secretary will make an oral statement to the House? Can the Home Secretary find a way of explaining how he plans to use his discretion—discretion that the House has given to him—on this subject?
On Wednesday, when we deal with the European Parliamentary Elections Bill, may we have confirmation that there will be the normal Committee stage? On the Bill dealing with the House of Lords, can the right hon. Lady confirm that it will begin in the House, and that all stages of this constitutional measure will be taken on the Floor of the House? Will she consider allocating extra time for a debate on the Second Reading of the Greater London Authority Bill, many stages of which we would again expect to be taken on the Floor of the House?
Finally, on the Christmas recess, is it her intention that the House should sit in Christmas week? Can she give us an indication of the dates of the Christmas recess?

§ Mrs. Beckett
On the right hon. Gentleman's first point, the date of the revenue support grant settlement will be 2 December—next Wednesday. The statement will be made here, then.
On the matter of General Pinochet, I, like the right hon. Gentleman, am conscious of your ruling, Madam Speaker. The right hon. Gentleman asked me to ask the Home Secretary to explain how he intends to use his discretion. I am not entirely sure that that can be reconciled with the ruling that he has just mentioned, but I take on board that he is anxious to have the issue explored.
The right hon. Gentleman asked about the handling of the Bill on House of Lords reform. Obviously, that will be subject to discussion. I anticipate that the Bill will begin in the House. He asked me for it all to be taken on the Floor of the House. I hope that that can be subject to discussion and agreement through the usual channels in the ordinary way.
The right hon. Gentleman pressed me to provide extra time for the Greater London Authority Bill, and to take much of it on the Floor of the House. Again, the issue of 315 what and how much should be taken on the Floor can be discussed—and, I hope, agreed—through the usual channels. As for whether we should have more than the normal first day for the Bill on the Floor, he makes a fair point. I am not at all unsympathetic, and I will certainly consider giving the extra time that he seeks.
The right hon. Gentleman asked about the proceedings on the European Parliamentary Elections Bill. I anticipate that the Bill will go through the proper proceedings. The Government motion will be published next week.
The right hon. Gentleman asked about the Christmas recess, and I sympathise. I realise that we are much nearer to the Christmas recess than perhaps is entirely comfortable for hon. Members before publishing the dates. Equally, he will appreciate that we are, literally, in the first week of the new Session. I am afraid that I cannot give him the dates today. I shall give the House the information as soon as I can.

§ Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)
Will we have a statement next week on the court judgment in Japan on the allied prisoners of war? Is my right hon. Friend aware that this matter has been raised on a number of occasions, when colleagues from both sides of the House have referred to the unspeakable treatment which British and other allied prisoners suffered at the hands of the Japanese—one of whom is my constituent, Stephen Long? Should not the British Government take up this matter with the Japanese, because those people who served so bravely in the war and were treated in such a terrible and evil manner are simply asking for an apology from the Japanese Government, and for compensation? Yesterday, we had an excellent decision on human rights, but the decision by the Japanese on the subject has been very poor.

§ Mrs. Beckett
I understand my hon. Friend's strong views and the concerns of his constituents. The whole House sympathises deeply with those who brought the case for the suffering that they have endured, and we understand their disappointment. I fear that I am not in a position to offer my hon. Friend a statement next week, but it will not have escaped his notice that we are to have a debate on foreign affairs in the House tomorrow.

§ Mr. Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove)
Liberal Democrats welcome the decision to move ahead quickly with the European Parliamentary Elections Bill. Can the Leader of the House give us an assurance that the Government will push ahead speedily to ensure that all stages of the legislation are in place in time for there to be fair and proportional elections in Europe next year, and that we can overcome the obstructions of the House of Lords?
Will there be time for a debate on the Acheson report on public health, which was one of the central planks of Labour's manifesto at the general election? It would be right and proper for the House to have an opportunity to discuss the important recommendations in the report.
May I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to early-day motion 33,
[That this House notes that there are an estimated 44 million television sets in the United Kingdom, and that many require up to 80 per cent. of full power when in 316 stand-by mode; notes that on the Parliamentary Estate there are over 2,000 monitors and sets, all of which are frequently in stand-by mode; believes that significant energy and financial savings could be made by switching off wasteful stand-by units; therefore calls for a vigorous national campaign to raise public awareness, and to promote the rapid introduction of less fuel-consuming technology; and requests the House authorities to examine urgently their purchasing and operating policies to minimise the waste of electricity by stand-by units in the Parliamentary Estate.]?
Can the right hon. Lady find time for the House authorities to consider whether savings could be made by switching off television and computer monitors in the Parliamentary Estate, which would contribute to the Government's achievement of the Kyoto targets for the reduction of greenhouse gases?

§ Mrs. Beckett
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his kind remarks about the Government's intention to press on with the European Parliamentary Elections Bill. I can certainly assure him that it will be speedily dealt with in this place, but he will appreciate the fact that I am not in a position to know what will happen to it thereafter. Indeed, the fact that we cannot know such things is the reason for re-introducing the legislation in the first place.
The Acheson report was commissioned by the Government and it is certainly our intention that the findings should contribute to our wider health strategy, which will be spelt out in the White Paper, "Our Healthier Nation", in the new year. I certainly expect that the report will be taken into account, but I cannot offer a statement specifically on the subject in the near future.
The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point about television monitors. I rather think that it is a matter for the Accommodation Committee or another Committee of the House rather than directly for me, but I am sure that my observations and his will have been heard.

§ Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley)
My right hon. Friend will know that the Government are imminently to issue a consultation paper on leasehold reform. There is to be a major lobby on the subject next week. Governments over the years have tried to deal with the matter, so can my right hon. Friend give us an assurance that, when we have a debate in Government time, on a motion for the Adjournment of the House, we will have time to debate fully all the complexities?

§ Mrs. Beckett
I am most grateful to my hon. Friend, who takes a great interest in this subject, as do many hon. Members. What is discussed in Adjournment debates is not necessarily a matter for me, but we are all very conscious of both the complexity and the importance of the subject. I feel confident, knowing his experience and ingenuity, that he will find ways of raising the matter.

§ Mr. Peter Brooke (Cities of London and Westminster)
There is no edge to this question. What rules are the Government currently applying on parliamentary private secretaries intervening in debates or asking oral questions relating to their Departments?

§ Mrs. Beckett
I cannot say off hand, to be perfectly frank. I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for saying 317 that there is no edge to his question, but I am sure that there is a point to it. If it is a point that concerns him, perhaps he will let me know.

§ Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)
In view of the fact that you, Madam Speaker, have already ruled that we cannot have a debate or a statement on the question of Pinochet, would it be in order for me to say, on behalf of many Labour Members, that we would regard it as gut-wrenching if he was allowed to go back to Chile?

§ Mr. Robert Syms (Poole)
That's a quote.

§ Mrs. Beckett
I am confident that it was unnecessary to say that that was a quote. I hear what my hon. Friend says and I understand his concern, but I am ever mindful, Madam Speaker, of your reminder to us of the status of that matter.

§ Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)
Further to the disturbingly non-committal reply by the Leader of the House to my right hon. Friend the shadow Leader of the House, will she confirm that the European Parliamentary Elections Bill—a constitutional measure—will have a Committee stage?

§ Mrs. Beckett
I fully expect that the House will have a proper opportunity to consider the Bill. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman was not present, but I remind him that we have already considered the Bill in full.

§ Mr. Andrew Mackinlay (Thurrock)
Further to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick), may I draw to my right hon. Friend's attention the fact that I have asked in the past whether we could have a dedicated debate to consider the issue of war veterans, widows and dependants? The last time we had such a debate was on 1 July 1996 and it was one of the best attended Friday debates. There would be universal interest in the House in giving the issue substantial parliamentary time and perhaps it should become part of our annual parliamentary calendar, like the debates we have on the armed forces and the police. I hope that my right hon. Friend will give early consideration to the matter.

§ Mrs. Beckett
I am most grateful to my hon. Friend and I know what a great interest he takes in the matter. He has a strong record of advocacy on behalf of veterans and their families, who have made great sacrifices for this country. I shall bear his remarks in mind.

§ Rev. Martin Smyth (Belfast, South)
The Leader of the House will probably have seen the press release issued by Families Against Intimidation and Terror about punishment beatings, which have continued even during November, and alleging that a high percentage of those beatings have been carried out by those recently released on licence. May we have a statement in the House next week to examine the issue and probe it further?
As a Member who represents a constituency from which it is not possible just to run up the road to London, may I press for an early notification of the Christmas Adjournment? Many other people want to get back home for Christmas and the planes might be full.

§ Mrs. Beckett
I do indeed take the hon. Gentleman's last point and I apologise to him and to the House. I am 318 sure that the House will appreciate that, after the length of the overspill, we are in an unusual position this year in that we are in the first week of the Session, yet close to Christmas.
On the hon. Gentleman's serious first point, I know that the issue is of as much concern to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and her Ministers as it is to him and all who wish to see a settled peace emerging among the communities in the island of Ireland. I will take great heed of his remarks, but I cannot at this moment undertake to arrange a statement next week.

§ Mr. Gareth R. Thomas (Harrow, West)
My right hon. Friend will be aware of the excellent progress that has been made to reform the health service. I invite her to join me in congratulating the newly elected and very enthusiastic members of the Harrow West primary care group, which has just had its first meeting. When will the legislation on the modernisation of the national health service come before the House? We need to sweep away the last vestiges of the appalling internal market which wasted so many resources on bureaucracy.

§ Mrs. Beckett
I am entirely happy to join my hon. Friend in congratulating the Harrow West primary care group and I am confident that their enthusiasm will lead to the provision of a better system of health care in the locality. The national health service legislation will come before the House as early as possible, but I cannot at this moment give my hon. Friend a date.

§ Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West)
Has the right hon. Lady read Glasgow's The Herald today, and does she agree that the leaking of any Select Committee report is a gross discourtesy to the House?

§ Mrs. Beckett
I fear that my daily reading does not encompass The Herald, for which I feel confident that I should apologise. I certainly agree that leaking is always to be deplored, and it is something in which I have never engaged.

§ Dr. Desmond Turner (Brighton, Kemptown)
In recognition of the fact that there are 400 days to go until the millennium, will my right hon. Friend indicate the Government's progress on preparations for that event? Will it be possible for the House to debate an issue that could have grave consequences if it is not successfully handled?

§ Mrs. Beckett
As my hon. Friend will know, the Government have put in hand measures to tackle any problems that may arise from the millennium date change. We are working to ensure that there is no material disruption of services. We also have a mechanism for regular reporting to the House on progress in Government Departments and in the wider public sector. I hope to be able to make the latest information available to the House in the not-too-distant future. I fear that I cannot now promise my hon. Friend a debate on the matter, but it is an issue to which we may return in time.

§ Mr. Syms
Will the Leader of the House make representations to the Foreign Secretary for an early statement to the House on security and travel 319 arrangements for British citizens going to Chile? The right hon. Lady may not be aware that 2,000 boy scouts, guides and leaders will attend the world scout jamboree in Chile on 20 December, and that many of them will take off for that event over the next few weeks. Many parents are anxious to receive advice from the Foreign Office before their children go to a country where relations are a little volatile at present.

§ Mrs. Beckett
I can help the hon. Gentleman immediately. He need merely come to the House tomorrow to ask the Foreign Secretary himself about the situation.

§ Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield)
As the hon. Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Dr. Turner) has said, there are 400 days to go until the millennium. Will the right hon. Lady find time for an emergency debate on the Jubilee line? Is she aware that in the Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport just three hours ago, the chief executive of London Transport said that he could not guarantee that the line would be ready for the opening of the millennium dome? Is she aware that the New Millennium Experience Company says that at least 55 per cent. of those who will visit the dome would need to get there via the Jubilee line if the dome were to be viable?

§ Mrs. Beckett
I was not aware of the statement made by the chief executive of London Transport. I am sure that all hon. Members will be sorry to learn that there may be difficulties, but I feel confident that we can rely on the Deputy Prime Minister to take the matter up with some vigour.

§ Dr. Vincent Cable (Twickenham)
May I request an early statement on a major tax anomaly that affects about 300,000 low-income, non-taxpaying pensioners who stand to lose an average of £75 a year as a result of the withdrawal of tax credit on dividends? Is the right hon. Lady aware that a file on that subject has been sitting in the pending tray of the Paymaster General for more than five months, despite a public assurance to the House that the matter would be dealt with quickly, and despite an assurance in June from an all-party group—including the new Solicitor-General—that it would be dealt with urgently and sympathetically?

§ Mrs. Beckett
I hear the hon. Gentleman's observations. I know that such matters are not always easy to resolve, and I am aware that what Departments regard as "urgent" sometimes takes rather longer than people outside think reasonable. However, the hon. Gentleman makes a fair point, and I shall draw it to the attention of 320 my hon. Friend the Paymaster General and my hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor-General. I am confident that they will wish to make progress as fast as they can.

§ Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire)
May I ask for clarification on two points? Can the Leader of the House confirm that it will be possible for hon. Members to table amendments to the European Parliamentary Elections Bill, and that the timetable motion will provide an opportunity for those amendments to be properly debated? Secondly, 18 December, a Friday, is listed in the Order Paper as a non-sitting day.

§ Mrs. Beckett
11 December?

§ Sir Patrick Cormack
No, 18 December. In view of comments made by hon. Members, can the right hon. Lady assure us that the House will not be called back for a single day on the Monday of the week after 18 December? If there is any chance of an extra day being needed, will she ensure that it is the Friday rather than the Monday for the convenience of House staff and of all those who serve us?

§ Mrs. Beckett
I hear what the hon. Gentleman says and I will bear that in mind. Presumably, he is suggesting a full day of business on that Friday. I have mixed feelings. Although I take his point about the potential disruption and about not calling the House back for a single day, that presumably also means that he is suggesting I should call the House back for several days, which may not be as popular as he thinks. However, I feel confident that that is a matter that ought to be, and will be, considered through the usual channels.
On the hon. Gentleman's first question, I am not sure why Opposition Members keep raising that matter. Of course, there will be a proper timetable motion and the House will go through the proper stages of consideration of the Bill, as it always does. I am not prepared to be any more discursive on the matter because anyone who listened to Conservative Members would think that the House had been deprived of the opportunity to debate the measure.

§ Mr. Bercow
It has to be fully considered.

§ Mrs. Beckett
The hon. Gentleman is right. We have fully considered it and we rejected the views of another place on no less than five occasions, apart from all the ordinary time that we spent on the Bill. Of course, the House will have a proper opportunity to consider the matter and come to a view, but any notion that the Conservative party will be able to use it to further prolong debate on the matter will not meet with a warm reception on the Government side.