§ Question again proposed, That this House do now adjourn.
11.17 am§ Mr. SwayneI shall attempt to draw my remarks to a close as I see that other hon. Members wish to speak.
The view of the secular state of the New Testament is very much one of grudging tolerance—render to Caesar that which is Caesar's. The view that we have expressed in our coronation service is much more intimate: of priest and king intimately connected by the anointing of oil and the consecration of the monarch. The monarch reigns not only by the grace of God, but with the blessing of God and is defender of the faith. I suggest that such an image is not open to amendment as Professor Weller would have us believe.
I say in passing that the communion service has been an integral part of the coronation service from the outset. The only monarch who avoided it was James II, and we all know what became of him. I argue that any attempt to include, as Professor Weller appears to require, the active participation in the act of acclamation by other faiths would undermine the fundamental of the principal faith—the first commandment.
There is an entirely proper argument to be had about an entirely secular state that is devoid of religious trappings, but we should not go down the road of unravelling our religious settlement by accident or by trying to change its nature, thereby ending up with a coronation service not dissimilar to the political correctness that characterised the opening of the millennium dome.
§ Mr. Alan Hurst (Braintree)It is with some pleasure that I follow the hon. Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne). At first I thought that he was wise to move from debating the internet to constitutional history, but his circumlocution began to make that subject an even bigger risk than the first. I intend to be very much safer and, as would be expected of most hon. Members, say a few unkind words about Barclays bank. The matter has been well covered by my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough, South and Cleveland, East (Dr. Kumar)—I do not propose to go over the same ground again—and parallel points were made by the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath).
There is a natural interrelationship between banks and post offices in rural areas. Barclays is currently running an advertising campaign using fairly expensive actors, and I understand that its slogan is, "A big bank for a big world". One fears that that may become, "Only one bank for the whole world". Barclays has been singled out as the major culprit, but it is only third in the league table of infamy, as the NatWest bank and Lloyds TSB have closed more branches.
Barclays has suffered from a lack of good public relations, but, most of all, the banks have all suffered from a lack of any form of community spirit. That problem is endemic to modern society and businesses have changed character rapidly. Many, however large, were family run, or run by an employer who lived in the community, close to or alongside his work force. He was bonded to that 1107 community through direct terms of employment, knowing his work force socially and performing acts of benevolence for that community. All that has been swept away over a short period.
The connection between the business community and the local community has gone. We see that on a vast scale with Rover, whose owners are dismissing a country just as Barclays is dismissing villages. Governments of a democratic persuasion throughout the world sometimes need to put their nationalist tendencies aside, and we may have a lot more in common with the Governments of France, Germany and Italy than with large corporations that flit from one country to another, to the disadvantage of the inhabitants of all of them.
I want to raise another subject that has been visited often and would do so with an even greater tremor were my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) still present. I must declare an interest as a solicitor before I discuss magistrates courts. Like all hon. Members, I fear that there will be further waves of closures. The county of Essex suffered that fate in early 1998 and, as each month goes by, other counties end up in the same position.
The appeal ratio is interesting, and the fees of a lawyer appealing on behalf of magistrates courts would not be large, as the success rate is remarkably small. There were only two successful appeals under the Conservative Administration, and I suppose that the Government would say that they are twice as good because over the past three years there have been four successes in 48 cases.
Again, the problem is the divorce between democracy and the functions of government. Formerly, the magistrates courts were administered by a committee of the county council, whose members are subject to the wonderful invention—if one might put it that way—of having to be elected. That stimulates the mind, as one has to listen to what the people in one's community have to say. That, of course, does not apply to chief executives of health authorities or to members of health trusts or magistrates courts committees. They do not have to be elected and can act as they will until discharged, when they receive a large settlement.
We are missing the whole point about magistrates courts and their place in the community. I have in my hand a document, issued by the Central Council of Magistrates Courts Committees, that is tragically early 21st century. The words "central council" have an almost Stalinist ring about them and represent the incredible mixture of communism and capitalism that we have these days, which is called corporate finance. The document is entitled "Good Practice Guide on Courthouse Closure", but the very idea of using a good practice guide to close something down is beyond me.
Decisions are made according to "criteria", which is one of the words that I never want to hear again. Criteria are a straitjacket—a device for coming to the conclusion that the decider had reached in the first instance. The arguments for closing magistrates courts, which have been well rehearsed by hon. Members, are that there is concern about facilities and that the disabled sometimes cannot climb the steps to the courthouse. Magistrates courts solve that problem by making the disabled travel 20 miles to court rather than using the nearest courthouse. Another argument is that witnesses and defendants need to be separated, but the point was well made in a recent debate that they would travel home on the same bus to that far-distant village after the case.
1108 When one judges whether institutions should remain open, one must try to sense the spirit of what one is trying to do. Magistrates courts administer justice with the benefit of local knowledge, in the spirit of the communities in which they are set. That is best achieved when magistrates come from a defined and relatively small area, sit in a courthouse in that area and judge people and situations of which they have long and extensive knowledge. None the less, the pace of contraction in the county of Essex, as elsewhere, has been rapid.
I used to appear regularly in a small two-room courthouse in Southminster on the Dengie marshes, where the interviews took place in the car park. The spirit there was as it should be. The magistrates knew everything about the locality, and probably everything about the defendants as well, especially when they faced the antique Essex charge of going in search of coneys—I suppose that we would call it rabbit poaching—for which people were prosecuted on the Dengie marshes until the early 1980s. That courthouse has closed. Local people who have to attend court now get a train from Southminster to Wickford and change for Shenfield, where they change again and catch a train to Witham in my constituency. I suspect that that court, too, may be scheduled for closure.
When King Solomon made his judgment he did not pick up a book entitled, "The Best Practice Guide to Dividing Babies"; nor did he make his decision according to the appropriate criteria. He had a sense of justice and what was right. The sooner we move away from good practice, supposed quality assurance, transparencies and all the other gobbledegook of managerial tyranny, the better. We may then be able to retrieve the sense of justice in our local communities.
§ Mr. Christopher Leslie (Shipley)Today, we have a good opportunity to consider some important constituency matters before the Easter Adjournment. When I tell people that I represent Shipley, near Bradford in West Yorkshire, the image of the semi-rural part of my constituency—the leafy suburbs—often comes to mind. However, east Shipley, which is a disadvantaged corner of my area, is less well off than many areas of Bradford and many important issues need to be tackled. East Shipley contains the neighbourhoods of Windhill, Bolton Woods, Wrose, Owlet, central Shipley and parts of Saltaire. There are areas of high unemployment and difficulties caused by poor housing. We need to examine ways in which we can begin to share the prosperity and economic growth that is now emerging in all parts of our community. I am keen to see Shipley East share in that growing prosperity.
Much has been done by the Government to help Shipley East, including the national minimum wage, the new deal for the unemployed, the working families tax credit and the increases in child benefit. That money will bring greatest benefit to many of its residents, and I am pleased to see that the changes are beginning to have a significant effect. Unemployment there is dropping, although not as much as I should like. In particular, youth unemployment has fallen markedly, as has long-term unemployment, as experienced by those who have been unemployed for more than a year.
We have a high pensioner population in Shipley East, and I am pleased that the Government have been able to make a start in targeting those who are less well off, through 1109 the minimum income guarantee, the free television licence for the over-75s, which will be introduced shortly, and the £150 winter allowance. However, there is more to do.
We have done a lot. When I was a member of Bradford council, before I became a Member of Parliament, we managed to introduce several significant regeneration schemes in Shipley East. We retained its objective 2 area status, and obtained matched funds from the European Union to set against local public funds. We managed to lever £1 million out of objective 2 status, which was matched with another £1 million, and that money has brought significant benefits. For example, we have a scheme to increase information and communication technology learning—Shipley Communities Online. We have child care facility schemes, such as the Jumping Jacks scheme at Bolton Woods. Several other projects have started, thanks to other Government initiatives, such as the health action zone. We are working on developing a healthy living centre in Shipley East.
Several small but important ideas have helped to rebuild confidence and economic prosperity in the Shipley East community. They all add up to a comprehensive plan for regeneration and include small projects such as tree planting and road resurfacing. For example, Festival avenue is having a new road constructed, and £85,000 has been spent on bus shelters and new litter bins. Small things like that make a difference in improving the infrastructure of a less well-off community.
Through careful planning, we have also managed to secure a retail development at Low Well and significant industrial and job creation opportunities at Fox Corner in Shipley. I have worked hard, together with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, to try to get world heritage status for Saltaire, part of which is in Shipley East, and we are making good progress.
Some major issues have been controversial locally and have required sensitive consideration. One example is school reorganisation. East Shipley, like the rest of Bradford, has had a three-tier system for many years, with first, middle and upper schools, but we are now moving to the primary and secondary model prevalent across the country. That has been a difficult process with several schools having to close. However, from such ends come new beginnings and, although we were unsuccessful in persuading the council to site a new secondary school at the location of Wood End middle school, we have managed to obtain important new investment in Salt grammar school, the Frizinghall challenge school and Immanuel college. Many new classrooms, teaching facilities, sports facilities and other important education provisions will bring great benefits to the children of Shipley East.
Most important in many ways has been the focus on housing and tackling the poor quality of social and council housing in Shipley East. I am pleased that the council has been able to secure £1 million of new investment this year to refurbish many estates and improve, repair and re-roof many properties that were in a dilapidated state. For example, the old flats on Gaisby lane have been demolished and new houses are being built as I speak. That is a tangible example of the delivery of a regenerated community in a poorer area.
1110 Some successful local community organisations have made good progress, such as Windhill community centre, with its Windhill futures project. Kath Quinn and others are doing a great job in developing plans for the future. At Wrose community centre, Bob Lee and others are working hard to bring the neighbourhood together, and at Bolton Woods community centre, Tony Miller, who is also a local councillor for Shipley East, is working hard on several projects, including the information technology learning scheme that I mentioned earlier. I pay tribute to the local councillors for Shipley East, Mark Blackburn, Phil Thornton and Tony Miller, who do a lot of good work, sometimes unsung.
Much has been done in Shipley East, but there is much more to do. I must emphasise the need for housing regeneration. One corner of Windhill—Wood End crescent—is particularly deprived. It has a very dilapidated estate of three and four-storey blocks of flats that are derelict and crumbling. They are half-empty because nobody wants to live there. I fear that they may be beyond saving and we will need to consider rehousing the few remaining residents. We should also consider flattening those properties and building new social housing on Wood End crescent estate. I have spoken to the council's chair of housing, Jim O'Neill, and the city housing officer, Geraldine Howley. They toured the estate with me, and we have a plan to make progress by June towards funding new housing on that site.
We have delivered a lot in Shipley East, but there is more to do. As a Labour party, under a Labour Government, we will get there.
§ Dr. Rudi Vis (Finchley and Golders Green)I was not here at 9.30 am and I did not think that I would be recognised, so I have not written anything down. It is no use sending me little envelopes, because I will not know exactly what I have ended up saying. I am a member of the Council of Europe and in January we had a debate about Chechnya. Many right hon. and hon. Members from this House and colleagues from the other place contributed to that excellent debate. We made several proposals to which we believed the Government of Russia should adhere and said that we would revisit the issue in April to see whether any progress had been made. However, not much progress was made, and there have been enormous human rights violations in Chechnya. These matters have been discussed by the Prime Minister and the new president of Russia, Mr. Putin.
In the context of the Council of Europe, there are other nations with poor human rights records. I wish to refer to Turkey, a nation with phenomenal human rights problems. It has other problems, such as the divided Cyprus on which there have been a large number of UN resolutions, none of which Turkey has adhered to. There is the Ilisu dam, into which we are potentially putting £200 million which will flood many of the historical areas of the Kurdish people. We have had the Loizidou case, which is now nearly 20 months old, on which Turkey is not listening to the European Court of Human Rights.
The main issue is the human rights violations by Turkey, its military and Government, against the Kurdish people. I have always been amazed that we have no Kurdish representatives on the Council of Europe, the Western European Union, the Organisation for Security 1111 and Co-operation in Europe, NATO or any of the international bodies, despite the fact that a large percentage of the population of Turkey is Kurdish. We must ask why there is no fair representation of the Kurdish people.
The PKK, depending on where one stands, is either a terrorist organisation or a group of freedom fighters. However, it has come up with new plans for peace, to which the Turkish Government have not reacted. I would argue that the PKK should no longer be seen as a terrorist organisation. We have been willing in other parts of the world to start discussions with organisations that may have been terrorist in the past. If we could start discussions with the PKK, it would be a good step for stability in that part of southern Europe and the middle east.
The PKK' s peace plans were sent to the Foreign Office, where officials said that the plans were wonderful, but that they could go no further because the PKK was a terrorist organisation. Perhaps the Foreign Office could examine those plans again and build bridges with the political wing of the PKK to help the peace process in Turkey for the Kurdish people.
§ Mr. Gareth R. Thomas (Harrow, West)First, I associate myself with the remarks of my hon. Friends the Members for Middlesbrough, South and Cleveland, East (Dr. Kumar) and for Braintree (Mr. Hurst), who have done us a service in highlighting the continuing concern about bank closures. I am committed to the idea of a community reinvestment Act, requiring banking and financial services providers to disclose their level of investment in areas of deprivation.
The social exclusion unit report, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough, South and Cleveland, East referred, highlighted the inadequacy of voluntary disclosure by banks. I am not convinced that that voluntary approach will work, but I await with interest a Bank of England report on the subject which is due shortly.
I want to concentrate on a specific local issue and highlight the need to expand intensive care and high-dependency unit facilities within my local NHS trust. These facilities are crucial at district general hospitals, and help to ensure safe clinical care and to improve the entire patient care process within hospitals. They help also to minimise treatment delays.
Northwick Park and St. Marks hospital—which sits just in the borough of Brent, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Brent, North (Mr. Gardiner)—serves my constituents and those of my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, East (Mr. McNulty). In the run-up to the last general election, the previous Government closed the accident and emergency units at Mount Vernon hospital and Edgware general hospital—at a stroke closing two thirds of the accident and emergency provision that had served constituents in Harrow.
The decisions marked the end of Mount Vernon hospital's time as a district general hospital. That move continues to be resented deeply by my constituents—not least because it has led to recent decisions to shift the regional specialties in burns, plastics and oral-maxillofacial surgery off the Mount Vernon hospital site to Northwick Park hospital.
1112 I wish to praise the considerable work and effort of the Pinner Association, the Hatch End Association and Community Voice who, between them, collected more than 80,000 signatures against the initial proposal to shift burns and plastics services to Chelsea and Westminster hospital, well out of the local area. Having that scale of support makes meetings with local health decision makers more productive. The news last year that we had finally secured the burns and plastics unit at Northwick Park hospital, with much better access for Harrow residents, has been welcomed—albeit reluctantly, because the move from Mount Vernon was required.
Northwick Park and St. Mark's hospital merged with Central Middlesex hospital in April last year to create the North-West London Hospitals NHS trust. As well as bringing in new management, the merger means that the trust is now the biggest provider of acute care in north-west London. I am delighted that the accident and emergency unit is benefiting from the Government's casualty modernisation scheme, with a £2.2 million refit due to be completed by autumn this year.
With the transfer of burns, plastics and oral-maxillofacial services from Mount Vernon, Northwick Park hospital is set to expand further. That will increase the pressures on intensive care and for proper high-dependency unit provision. Northwick Park hospital is the largest hospital in the trust. It currently has some six intensive treatment beds, and no high-dependency facilities at all. The existing facilities are not adequate to meet local demand and need urgent redevelopment and expansion.
The ITU facilities at Northwick Park are co-located with the theatre complex, with six ITU beds backing on to theatre recovery. There are options for fast-track and relatively inexpensive expansion of the existing area, which would meet the immediate needs of the local population. There is space to add two beds capable of use either as ITU or HDU beds, plus space for a further four HDU beds. That would be achieved through the conversion of areas at the heart of the current ITU department. At present, they are used for offices and laboratories, which could be relocated to the hospital's basement.
The overall fabric of the ITU facility at Northwick Park hospital is good, and recent refurbishment means that the proposed conversion could be completed quickly and at a relatively low capital cost. In addition, I am told that there has been a proposal to add four HDU beds to the medical assessment unit if funding is available. That would incur no capital building costs, although there would be some equipment and recurrent costs.
The other crucial ingredient in the successful expansion of intensive care and high dependency unit provision is the staffing needs of those facilities. The intensive care areas in the North West London Hospitals NHS trust are fully staffed, with both trained and untrained nurses. Recruitment and retention of nursing staff in intensive care has been problematic nationally, but the trust is especially proud of its record of attracting and retaining trained intensive care nursing staff. Each site consistently attracts a high level of interest when new jobs are advertised. No problems are anticipated in recruiting staff if additional beds can be opened.
One of the reasons for the success enjoyed by both hospitals in retaining staff is the flexible approach that they take to intensive-care nursing, together with their 1113 commitment to proper training and education. At Northwick Park hospital, key theatre recovery staff are intensive-care trained. Within that innovative model, the group of nurses works as part of a team with the ITU staff, and they led a pilot project on high dependency care last winter.
It is likely that there will be increased demand for intensive care services. The trust has a full staff complement on each of its two sites. It—and Northwick Park hospital in particular—is extremely well placed to open additional ITU and high-dependency unit beds to cope with that expected increase in demand.
The trust has assured me that it will continue to develop innovative staffing solutions, which may offer lessons for the wider national health service and contribute to the development of ITU and high-dependency services across the capital. At Northwick Park hospital, there is now an urgent need to expand the intensive treatment unit to meet that local demand, and to open high-dependency beds to improve the patient care process. Investment in that facility would offer a long-term benefit to the local health economy.
I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will encourage a swift and positive response from Ministers and officials in the Department of Health.
§ Mr. David Drew (Stroud)I am delighted to take part in this debate. I would have liked to talk about my idea for a new deal for pensioners, and the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath) could have persuaded me to explore the rural dimension, but perhaps he would enjoy reading the rural manifesto launched by Labour Members this week. However, both The Independent and Conservative Front-Bench Members decided to concentrate on what that manifesto did not contain rather than on what it did. That is unfortunately what happens to modern politicians, but we certainly did not say that we wanted to build excessive numbers of houses in the green belt, as they maintained.
I have two brief points to raise with my hon. Friend the Minister, and a third that I would like to cover in slightly more detail.
We have heard a lot recently about the future of British Nuclear Fuels plc, and the current proposals were aired last week. It is important to understand that Sellafield is not the whole of BNFL, and that BNFL is not the whole of the nuclear industry. There is an important plant at Berkeley in my constituency, where some of the brightest brains in the country work on the Magnox reactors. There is also great investment in ideas for the future, and it is about time that the House held a proper debate on nuclear energy.
The announcement on electricity supply made last Monday was very important, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) will agree, but we cannot ignore the other elements in that supply. I hope that all the negative publicity associated with BNFL could be put in the context of how we want to progress. For all sorts of reasons, we need people to go into this important industry, either to clean it up or to explore future developments in power generation.
1114 My second brief point concerns the sale of land by the British Railways Board, which affects the constituencies of many hon. Members. I have a particular interest in the matter, because there is a proposal for a land sale at the Stonehouse site on Bristol road in my constituency. With the help of the county council those opposed to the sale have managed to delay it until a proper investigation has been held.
I have written to the British Railways Board, the shadow Strategic Rail Authority and the rail companies about the matter. I have also raised the matter in questions to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions. The process is rather byzantine, and I feel that there should be a presumption against sale where there is a potential to bring sites back into use, as is no doubt the case with the Stonehouse site. I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will take that message forward. It is all well and good to talk about the benefits of bringing money into the Treasury, but it is more important that we consider the potential for integrated use of not only rail transport but all public transport.
The main issue that I want to raise is of constituency interest but also some national interest. In many respects, home improvement agencies are a good news story for the Government. We have done an awful lot to extend work on improving homes through the home energy efficiency scheme and more recently—it is a pity that the hon. Member for Southend, West (Mr. Amess) is not in his place—with the Warm Homes and Energy Conservation Bill. The Bill has been accepted by the Government and has reached Report stage and we hope that it will receive all-party support. The Bill is an important statement. As always, one could call for more detail and an even more advanced strategy to achieve what we all want, which is to help people who live in poverty and cannot heat their houses.
I declare an interest as a trustee of the Care and Repair agency in Stroud. The reason why I raise the issue at this time is that, although it is a good news story, some hon. Members—I know that my hon. Friend the Minister has a constituency interest in it—were disappointed that, having set up bureaux in different areas, the Government did not re-award the contract to Care and Repair. The co-ordinating body was run by Care and Repair England. The body was originally set up by Shelter and other agencies that are active in the field such as Age Concern, Anchor Trust, and so on.
Care and Repair lost the contract to fulfil the national co-ordinating role in January this year. That was disappointing in a number of respects. The agency felt that it had done a perfectly good job. It had civil servants sitting on its board. All the reports that came back to it said that it was doing a good job. Last year, it received a grant of £423,000, which was money well spent. It has always argued that the grant did not cover the work that it did so it had to find other ways of funding its work. Having done the work, one would have thought that Care and Repair had a fair chance of having the contract awarded a second time.
I know that the Audit Commission was unhappy that the first contract was awarded to Care and Repair England, but it is the national co-ordinating body. It is the parent body of all the agencies and it works closely with other bodies such as Anchor Trust. The sad thing was that Care and Repair was not re-awarded the contract. I have 1115 been trying to get to the bottom of that. I have written a number of letters to my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning. I know that he was ill when the contract was awarded to Collective Enterprises Ltd. I cast no aspersions on that organisation, but we are looking for a further extension of the number of bureaux, and Care and Repair England had that under way.
Care and Repair has a good reputation for advice and working with the different bureaux, yet it lost the contract supposedly because it put in too high a bid. That may or may not be the case, but the problem was that it was apparently given the wink by people close to the Ministry to go for a realistic bid in terms of what it costs properly to co-ordinate home improvement agencies. Yet as a result of putting in that bid, it did not get the contract. I hope that there is a case for taking forward the issue with the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions because the matter has left a bitter taste in the mouth of the agencies.
If we have a good news story, we should know what is going on and how matters are handled. They are important. Care and Repair has done an awful lot of good work. I have spoken before about the value of the organisation, and justice must not only be done but be seen to be done.
§ Mr. Paul Tyler (North Cornwall)An interesting thread has run through the debate; that does not always happen on these occasions. The subjects of health, food and rural life have predominated; almost all hon. Members made some reference to them.
The hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Ms Jones) referred to the Health and Safety Executive. The hon. Member for Gosport (Mr. Viggers) told us about the threat to the Royal hospital Haslar. The hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) spoke about chronic bronchitis among former miners. I very much endorse his point about the need to keep such issues out of the hands of lawyers—with all due respect to the hon. Member for Braintree (Mr. Hurst), who subsequently confessed his membership of that profession. I am only too aware that sufferers from organophosphate poisoning have experienced similar difficulties with compensation.
My hon. Friend the Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath) referred to concerns in rural areas—to which I shall return in a moment—that are echoed throughout the country. The hon. Members for Middlesbrough, South and Cleveland, East (Dr. Kumar) and for Harrow, West (Mr. Thomas) talked about banks that were pulling out of their responsibilities to rural areas.
I thought that the hon. Member for Southend, West (Mr. Amess) would not fit into my pattern, but he did because he was concerned about breast-screening services. That matter is most important to several hon. Members.
Similarly, I thought that the hon. Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne) might disappear into another subject. However, when he engaged with the effect of internet pornography, from which he was saved by the Division Bell—I always wondered about the origin of that expression—it became clear that such practices could have an unsettling effect on the mental balance of those who indulge in them. That too is a health issue.
1116 I endorse every word said by the hon. Member for Braintree on the fact that magistrates courts committees throughout the country—including my area of Devon and Cornwall—seem to be out of touch with real life. I was delighted to hear a solicitor making those points. I hope that, as a result of the hon. Gentleman's advocacy, the Lord Chancellor will take the Book of Solomon home for the Easter recess rather than the criteria of the central council.
The hon. Member for Shipley (Mr. Leslie) made an important connection between healthy living and poverty and housing. I was pleased to hear that there is a healthy living centre in his area. I wish that they existed in all our areas.
The hon. Member for Harrow, West spoke about intensive care. That is a growing problem, not only in central London but throughout the country.
I have great difficulty in dissenting from anything said by the hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew). I wish he would be more controversial. He always picks on Liberal Democrat policies and endorses them. However, I strongly agree with him on the connection between warm homes and health; it is extremely important and I am glad that, together, we are making some progress on that matter.
I want to add to the themes of nutrition and health—issues to which we do not pay sufficient attention. There are three related issues. The first is the continuing threat to smaller, specialist, top-quality food producers, processors and retailers.
The second is the organic sector, about which I have a special concern. Consumer demand is increasing rapidly, but three quarters of the organic produce on supermarket shelves has to be imported—what a crazy situation.
Thirdly, there is the dairy sector, which includes many small family farms. They have been hit disproportionately hard by BSE, by the structural changes in milk marketing in recent years and by the uncompetitive level of the pound. Weekly—even daily—my hon. Friend the Member for Somerton and Frome and I share the experience of talking to dairy farmers who are in a desperately difficult situation.
That was why I was pleased to read the report, published on 24 January, of the Select Committee on Agriculture on the marketing of milk. A few days ago, the Government published their reply to that Committee, from which, sadly, it is evident to every Member who represents an agricultural area that the Select Committee is far closer than the Government to the real life—the grass roots—of the dairy sector. The Government are substantially out of touch.
This sector, and those who process and retail its products, are hit by too many regulations. They encounter a lack of flexibility, of discretion and of common sense in those who are given responsibility for implementing those regulations.
Just as the specialist cheesemakers are particularly badly hit by that situation, so are the low throughput abattoirs. In that area, our continental competitors have a considerable edge over us, because they recognise the need to differentiate according to size between the different organisations involved in the food process, and they, with their artisan or craftsman status and with derogation, manage to ensure that the smaller producer or processor is given a quite different set of regulations. In 1117 Britain, that simply is not the case. We must persuade our Ministers, from all parts of the United Kingdom, to follow the example of the continent.
I have already mentioned a related issue—that of organic supply. At the National Farmers Union annual general meeting in February, the Prime Minister, in his speech, made the following absolutely explicit statement:
Our plans envisage a trebling of the area under organic farming by 2006.That means an increase from the current figure of 3 per cent. to 9 per cent. in that period. In my private Member's Bill, the Organic Food and Farming Targets Bill, we are looking slightly further ahead—to 2010. Many Members on both sides of the House, senior Members and those who have great expertise in that subject area, have backed the Bill. I am now looking to see not only whether the Government will live up to the Prime Minister's aspiration, promise, pledge or whatever it may be, but whether they will endorse my Bill. The content of a number of answers that I have received to parliamentary questions that I tabled in recent weeks do not give me much confidence that the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has endorsed the Prime Minister's target, let alone my own.Next, I return to the dairy sector. The Committee report is a very thorough document, as one would expect from one of the most important Select Committees of the House. It refers even to the detailed issues that were raised by the so-called Duckett's Cheese case in the county represented by my hon. Friend the Member for Somerton and Frome, which I have mentioned before in the House. That case is alarming, because it seems that the hygiene police are being given additional powers and are not being in any way constrained, even though the case obviously has huge implications for the way in which we deal with problems relating to the sector.
The Prime Minister's summit at No. 10 Downing street to consider together all the issues surrounding the agricultural industry produced useful, stopgap, temporary remedies, but the long-term remedies are not in place.
The marketing strength of most of our farms in this country is far outweighed by that of the supermarkets and the big processors. Therefore it is a buyer's market, and we cannot deal with that problem until we identify the extent to which there is real competition and ascertain that those commercial giants are not using monopolistic powers—oligopolistic powers. At the moment, we are looking in vain to the Department of Trade and Industry and the Competition Commission for a fundamental and radical review.
Imports of dairy products are at an all-time high. That of course relates to the strength of the pound, and will not just go away. Everyone will be trooping back through the door of No. 10 next year unless something is done to address that problem.
Finally, I wish to discuss vertical integration. Under the previous Government's deeply regrettable legislation, which not only massacred the quite good system of milk marketing but made it very difficult for a producer co-operative to be effective in the sale of milk, there was the real risk that Milk Marque would not only be a puny child but might die in infancy—and so it has proved. We alone in the Agriculture Committee, against the 1118 opposition of the Labour party and of the then Conservative Government, argued that producers—the farmers—should be given more market power.
I hope that, at the very least, the Minister who is present today will give us an undertaking that the Committee report and the Government's response to it will be debated as soon as possible—preferably before the Whitsun recess. Perhaps he would use his best endeavours to ensure that such a debate takes place, in Westminster Hall at least.
§ 12.9 pm
§ Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire)In a debate of 14 speeches that has ranged from Wood End crescent in Shipley to Chechnya, I am not easily able to detect a common thread, although there were a number of subjects in common—among them, that raised by the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler).
We are all grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising the plight of farmers. Those of us who represent rural constituencies are acutely aware that all sectors of agriculture are under enormous pressure. We only have to look at the demonstration across in Parliament square to know just how acutely one sector is suffering, but every aspect of agriculture is under great pressure. Although it is of particular concern to hon. Members in rural seats, it is also of interest and concern to every hon. Member, because of the food that that industry provides.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Ms Jones) on her opening speech: her treatment of these debates is exemplary. I must not be too kind to her because if she were standing at the next general election, I would be doing my best to ensure that she did not get elected, but I deeply appreciate her exemplary manner in this House and as a neighbour. She rationed herself, as did the hon. Member for Finchley and Golders Green (Dr. Vis), to a five-minute speech, thus demonstrating that in five crisp minutes a topic can be dealt with adequately.
No hon. Member will cross swords with me when I say that the highlight of today's debate has been the return to vigorous and healthy form of the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner). We missed him in the last two of these Adjournment debates and we are glad that he is restored to health. He demonstrated in his own inimitable way just how a subject can and should be pursued. Although like the hon. Member for Braintree (Mr. Hurst), I could not necessarily associate myself with all the castigations of solicitors that he poured out today, he made some extremely valuable and cogent points.
§ Mr. SkinnerFly-by-night solicitors.
§ Sir Patrick CormackYes, the hon. Gentleman talked about fly-by-night solicitors: some do exist, and we all know about them. He made some trenchant points and we were glad to have his contribution.
My hon. Friend the Member for Gosport (Mr. Viggers) demonstrates that he has earned a long service and a good conduct medal for the way in which he has conducted the campaign for Haslar hospital. He now deserves the Victory Cross because, by highlighting to the House the importance of the hospital, he has shown how crucial it is not only to his constituency but to the services in general that it should be retained. At the beginning of February, I happened to be in Gibraltar on a Royal Fleet Auxiliary 1119 vessel. I asked some of the people who were running the hospital on the ship, "Is my hon. Friend overstating the case?" They said, "Most certainly he is not. We are extremely grateful to him and we very much hope that he will succeed." So do I.
We had an interesting speech from the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath). He has been in the forefront of those who have talked about the plight of rural post offices. The House has addressed the subject on a number of occasions and, I think, will do so again. Like the hon. Gentleman, I welcome the halting progress that has been made, but there is much more to be done before postmasters and mistresses are reassured. Coming from a constituency with many of these post offices, which are the lifeblood of the local community and the real community centre, I know how vital it is that they should survive.
I know, too, how important it is that there should be a more equitable distribution of funding for individual pupils. The hon. Gentleman spoke about Somerset. I have not been able to leave my place to check this, but I think that Staffordshire is even worse off.
§ Mr. David Heathindicated assent.
§ Sir Patrick CormackThe hon. Gentleman acknowledges that. This is an important point. Those of us who represent areas where children receive so much less per head than children in the home counties find the logic difficult to comprehend and the fairness impossible to comprehend. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Bolsover talks about the Tories. I have agitated on this issue on behalf of Staffordshire under successive Governments. We have not got the formula right. The Labour Government have now been in power for three years and it is time that they got the formula right. We very much hope that they will.
The hon. Member for Middlesbrough, South and Cleveland, East (Dr. Kumar) talked about banks. I have to be a little careful in my response to his argument, because I might provoke the Minister into saying something similar to what a junior Minister said a couple of weeks ago; he earned himself a firm slap on the wrist for doing so. However, my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition has made his own concerns clear, and he represents a constituency not a million miles from the hon. Gentleman's: indeed, it adjoins it. We all share those concerns. The hon. Member for Braintree (Mr. Hurst) was right to say that we should not just point the finger at Barclays: NatWest and Lloyds TSB have both closed more branches than Barclays. However, it behoves those who are in charge of our clearing banks to recognise that they have certain social obligations; that services need to be provided, particularly in rural areas; and that everything cannot be done on the internet or online.
My hon. Friend the Member for Southend, West (Mr. Amess) made another extraordinary omnibus speech of the kind with which he entertains the House regularly in Adjournment debates. He covered a variety of subjects, and I was glad that he referred to our former colleague the late Sir Stephen McAdden, whom I remember well. My hon. Friend made a powerful and eloquent plea for the breast cancer centre which was named after Sir Stephen's widow, who I understand still runs it. I hope that the Minister will respond positively on that, and to the other 1120 points that my hon. Friend made. I was amused that, when my hon. Friend spoke about crime, he cast himself in successive sentences as Mother Teresa and as Joe public. I think that he wears the mantle of the latter more easily than that of the former.
The hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox)—I was going to say the hon. Member for Cyprus because he frequently refers to Cyprus—sent me a note to explain that he is chairing an important Commonwealth Parliamentary Association meeting at the moment. That is why he cannot be here. He used the debate, as he does so often, in a classic way to highlight a particular case.
My hon. Friend the Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne) gave us a most interesting constitutional essay. All I would say to him is, "Don't let's tamper with the Act of Settlement." If a particular problem arises, it is within the competence of Parliament to deal with it when it arises. My hon. Friend talked about speed limits, and he also gave us a somewhat alarming account of how he was rescued from perdition by the Division bell. In doing that, he made it clear that there is real danger on the internet: that it is a point that we should all take very much to heart. Some us are perhaps mightily relieved that we no longer have young children who can play with these sets and call up the most extraordinarily grotesque images. It is a problem that the Government must tackle.
As well as dealing with the banks, the hon. Member for Braintree made a lovely side-swipe at managerial gobbledegook. I echo strongly what he said about that. We want good, plain speaking. The hon. Gentleman cited Solomon in the most exemplary fashion.
The hon. Member for Harrow, West (Mr. Thomas) talked about the need for more intensive-care facilities in his constituency. Again, the highlighting of constituency cases and problems is what the debate is mainly about; it is right that he should have done that. I cannot respond with any knowledge about Harrow, West, but I hope that the Minister will relay the hon. Gentleman's points to Ministers in the appropriate Department.
The hon. Member for Shipley (Mr. Leslie) came to praise the Government in what I thought were rather extravagant terms. I wonder whether there are local elections in Shipley next month. If there are, he was obviously aiming for appropriate headlines in the "Shipley Gazette", or whatever it is called. His blushing acquiescence shows that I have hit the nail on the head.
The debate has once again illustrated that it is a very useful occasion for the House. It enables Members to raise a whole range of topics and to do so in a non-confrontational way and in a manner that allows the Opposition to respond and the Government to take on board their points. I hope that the Minister will do just that.
In fulfilling my part of the time bargain, which I always scrupulously seek to do, may I conclude by wishing you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Minister and all hon. Members a very happy Easter? It has been a long haul since Christmas; Easter this year is almost as late as it can conceivably be. Although I had my leg pulled by the Member for Bolsover—and quite justifiably so—when I talked about sitting patterns, a more structured parliamentary year would not be a bad thing for any of us.
§ The Parliamentary Secretary, Privy Council Office (Mr. Paddy Tipping)The hon. Member for South Staffordshire (Sir P. Cormack) ended with a message, 1121 which I heard clearly. Several hon. Members gave messages today which they asked me to pass on to my ministerial colleagues. Some did so politely, asking whether I could have a word with Ministers. Others were more extreme and asked me to knock a few heads together. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), who always gets to the bottom of the matter, told me to poke a stick in an eye and pick up a few bricks.
Other hon. Members sent a message to their constituents, and I was particularly struck by the speech of the hon. Member for Gosport (Mr. Viggers). He spoke movingly to the troops back home, if I may put it like that—the 22,000 troops whom he met on the march to save Royal hospital Haslar. I also suspected that my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Mr. Leslie) was talking to the people back home in Saltaire, perhaps not because of the local elections, but to encourage his colleagues there.
Haslar hospital is important, and the hon. Member for Gosport, who has pursued the matter diligently, spoke authoritatively. He knows that the Government's position is that the defence side of the hospital is to close and move to Birmingham. There are problems in that, and I will convey his views to ministerial colleagues. The hon. Gentleman also knows that the plan is to open a new hospital for civilians in his area.
My hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, West (Mr. Thomas) also talked about a hospital, Northwick Park, which, I am told, had a serious flu crisis over the winter. The staff coped remarkably well, and I understand that they have been encouraged by the millions of pounds of funding, which my hon. Friend mentioned, which is being given to the hospital's accident and emergency unit. He knows that this year the NHS budget is growing by 9 per cent. in real terms. His request for a high dependency unit, which is a cornerstone of a modern district hospital, has been heard, and I shall pass on his views.
My hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Ms Jones) also raised health issues when she talked about health and safety. The Government's policy is clear: we want health and safety issues to become part of mainstream business. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover talked about the coal industry, and it is important that health and safety thinking permeates all business.
Small businesses may not have the necessary resources and expertise, and it is a key priority for the Government and the Health and Safety Commission to provide small firms with the help that they need to ensure the health and safety of their workers. As my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West said, the commission is considering a revised strategy, which it will publish shortly. I shall ensure that her remarks are reported directly to the Health and Safety Executive. My hon. Friend talked about the importance of small business, as did other hon. Members.
The hon. Member for Southend, West (Mr. Amess) mentioned a range of issues, including those relating to residential and nursing homes and employment agencies, which are very much small business issues. He also referred to the problems at the Lady McAdden breast 1122 centre in his constituency. That facility is supported by enormous local voluntary effort, and it is important that such provision has a healthy relationship with the mainstream NHS.
The hon. Gentleman also told us that he had a problem with cadets in his area. I understand that, as we speak, the Minister for the Armed Forces is helping to resolve the matter.
I am pleased to hear about the Palace theatre. I wondered whether the hon. Gentleman was to perform there.
Like the hon. Member for South Staffordshire (Sir P. Cormack), I was not sure whether he would be a Joe public figure in his performance, or more of a Mother Teresa figure.
The hon. Gentleman talked also about the need to tackle crime. He made strong points about doing practical things at local level, and contrasted that with strategies. The importance of the Government's policies is that strategies will be defined. Local policing plans will be drawn up that meet people's needs. There will be the opportunity to challenge the police. For example, we shall be able to challenge the chief constable of Essex if targets are not met.
Some of my hon. Friends talked not about small business but about the big business of the banks. It seems that, in some of their actions, the banks have treated customers with arrogance and contempt. It is important to nail that. I followed with interest the proceedings of the Select Committee on the Treasury earlier this week. There is a need to find new and better facilities. In a sense, the demand for better banking facilities, both in urban and in rural areas, is linked with what the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath) said about rural areas. I shall send him a copy of the manifesto produced by the rural group of Labour Members. It is a well-written document, which I plagiarise from time to time; there are ideas that we can pinch from one another. I accept, however, that we shall have to work hard on some people.
I was interested in a remarkable new concept of small farming—the leisure dairy farm. The hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler) talked about the needs of the farming industry and referred to regulations. We are over-regulated and we need to relieve the burden. I was interested in the point made by the hon. Members for Somerton and Frome and for North Cornwall about a retirement scheme. In principle, that would be a good way forward. The difficulty lies in working out a scheme which does not retire people out of the far end without drawing in new people.
My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew) talked about Care and Repair. I put on record my thanks to the staff, who have worked hard over many years. I know that my hon. Friend is pursuing the matter. As well as thanking the staff, let me express the hope that Collective Enterprises Ltd. delivers for elderly people.
I do not know how to describe the speech of the hon. Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne). I thought that he was going to get us into trouble at various times. He talked about the need to reduce speed on the roads, which is important. He spoke also of changing the culture surrounding the public's attitude to speed. He referred to phone boxes, pornography and circumcision. I was pleased that he was saved by the bell. I am not sure whether we should quote the phrase from Macbeth about 1123 the knell that summons thee to heaven or to hell. I was slightly concerned about the direction that the hon. Gentleman was taking.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover spoke forcefully about an issue that is close to his heart and mine—putting money in miners' pockets. They have given their health and, in some instances, their life, to keep us warm. It is essential that the 100,000 ex-miners are compensated quickly. The sum might be £2 billion eventually, and £55 million has been paid out. My hon. Friend is right to say that we need to focus on solicitors and health professionals.
My hon. Friend the Member for Shipley talked about regeneration. Saltaire should be a world heritage site; with his efforts, and those of his colleagues, I am sure that it is getting there.
My hon. Friends the Members for Tooting (Mr. Cox) and for Finchley and Golders Green (Dr. Vis) talked about Cyprus, Turkey and the European Union. There is an opportunity, with applications for EU entry, to try to resolve some of the difficulties.
This has been an interesting debate. I am sure that we shall have a good Easter, even though some of us will be involved in election duties until 4 May. The comments made during today's speeches show how seriously we all take our constituents' interests.
§ It being half-past Twelve o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.