House of Commons Hansard Debates for 26 Feb 1990

Dr. Moonie : I am sure that the Minister shares our concern for the future of British Steel. What action is he taking to promote its involvement in the construction of those pipelines and to increase the British contribution to them?

Mr. Morrison : I want British Steel to be as successful as the hon. Gentleman does. A significant number of pipelines have been approved in the past five years. Subject to being able to predict the future, we expect as many approvals in the next five years. That offers a significant market opportunity for British Steel which I hope that it will take.

Energy Efficiency

16. Mr. Jack : To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what reports from PowerGen he has received about energy-saving proposals.

Mr. Baldry : I have received no specific reports from PowerGen about energy-saving proposals, but I am aware of its interest in the subject.

Mr. Jack : I am disappointed. Perhaps my hon. Friend has not seen recent press reports on PowerGen's suggested initiative to save energy by insulating existing properties and factories rather than building new power stations. Perhaps he will evaluate that proposition, make public his findings and also publicise the benefits of insulating existing housing rather than concentrating simply on new build.

Mr. Baldry : If PowerGen is considering energy-saving proposals, that is entirely a matter for the company to decide. I applaud the company's business acumen in investigating the potential of energy efficiency. Everyone must have an interest in using energy as efficiently as possible.

Landfill Gas Schemes

17. Sir Trevor Skeet : To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what encouragement his Department has given to the development of landfill gas schemes.

21. Sir George Young : To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what encouragement his Department has given to the development of landfill gas schemes.

Mr. Peter Morrison : My Department took the lead in exploring the potential of landfill gas and has spent some £2 million on research, development and demonstration projects to encourage its exploitation as a fuel.

Sir Trevor Skeet : Does my right hon. Friend agree that pouring rubbish into large excavations in the fields owned

Column 11

by the London Brick Company and in other parts of the country will result in a great advantage to the environment? Is he aware that, although this source will contribute greatly to electricity production, a hazard exists and if houses are built on the sites, strict regulations, which I believe already exist, must be observed to ensure that they are protected?

Mr. Morrison : I agree with my hon. Friend about the significant advantages to be gained from landfill gas. I am delighted that about 50 of the 300 non-fossil fuel obligation applications relate to landfill gas. I agree that the correct regulations must be taken into account both when the gas is used and afterwards.

Sir George Young : Although, on the face of it, this seems an unlikely energy source, is it used overseas for useful purposes?

Mr. Morrison : In short, yes. I will provide my hon. Friend with the detail if he wishes.

Mr. Rogers : Does the Minister accept that the putrefaction processes involved in the generation of gas in landfill sites lead to considerable contamination of groundwater in many sites? In conjunction with the projects that his Department runs, will he ask the Department of the Environment to consider the impact of landfill sites on the general environment?

Mr. Morrison : The hon. Gentleman rightly points to the environmental aspects of landfill gas. That is why it is important to carry out a great deal of research and development. I should have hoped that the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues would welcome the initiatives that have been taken, not least because such projects involve recycling and contribute greatly to tackling the greenhouse effect.

Union of Democratic Mineworkers

19. Mr. Skinner : To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what meetings he has had with the officers of the Union of Democratic Mineworkers ; and what matters were discussed.

Mr. Wakeham : I have met the president of the Union of Democratic Mineworkers and we discussed a number of issues affecting the coal industry.

Mr. Skinner : Will the Secretary of State confirm that, at that meeting, the leaders of the UDM and the right hon. Gentleman discussed the possibility that if the Tories were re-elected they would introduce privatisation arrangements for British Coal and money would be laundered to the UDM not only to set up companies in advance to buy into British Coal but to use taxpayers' money in the form of actual cash or of departmental expertise? Given the press comments to that effect, is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to tell the House that no taxpayers' money has been handed over in any form to the UDM and will not be handed over in the event of privatisation?

Mr. Wakeham : I know of no taxpayers' money that has been handed over to the UDM. The hon. Gentleman is wrong if he thinks that he knows what went on at my meeting with the president of the UDM. It was a very interesting meeting and I told him about the Government's position on coal privatisation. For the hon. Gentleman's

Column 12

benefit, I will repeat what I said. I said that the Government were committed to privatising the coal industry in the next Parliament but had not determined the best way for that to be done. I said that I would welcome the president's suggestions of what he thought would be the best way for it to be done and I await his suggestions in due course.

Mr. Andy Stewart : When my right hon. Friend met the president of the Union of Democratic Mineworkers, did he discuss the fact that as British Coal is the largest power supply user in the country--the environmentally friendly mini-power station at Bilsthorpe--will be subject to the nuclear levy?

Mr. Wakeham : Negotiations about that power station are still in progress. The levy is paid by consumers of electricity and not by power stations and is based on an order that has been presented to the House.

Mr. Eadie : When the right hon. Gentleman met officials of the UDM, was he candid and frank with them? Did he tell them that if the Government continue to pursue their policies there will be a correspondingly large contraction of coal mining in the Nottinghamshire area as he has already intimated that the Government propose to give the go-ahead to the import of low-sulphur coal and as desulphurisation has a lower priority on his Department's agenda?

Mr. Wakeham : I do not think that that matter was raised when I spoke to the president of the UDM. Had it been raised, I should have confirmed that the Government are fully committed to the European directive, so there has been no change in that policy. I should also have mentioned that, in accordance with the policies of our predecessors, the Government do not seek to restrict the importation of coal.

I said to the president that the future place of British Coal in our economy depends on its ability to be the supplier of choice for the generating industry. I believe that an efficient British Coal will still maintain a substantial share of the generating industry's fuel requirements, and I hope that the industry will respond to the challenge before it.

DUCHY OF LANCASTER

Local Government Finance

64. Mr. Jack : To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what assessment he has made of the likely impact of the community charge on the revenues from his properties in Lancashire.

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. Kenneth Baker) : The community charge will have no effect upon revenue from Duchy property in Lancashire.

Mr. Jack : Is my right hon. Friend aware that Duchy residents are suffering the worst case of pillage since the Viking era in the unnecessarily high community charge that they will have to bear as a result of overspending by the Labour-controlled Lancashire county council? Does my right hon. Friend agree that their position could be helped if the county council adopted the Conservative

Column 13

group's suggestion of a charge £60 less than that proposed by Labour? Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating the Conservative group on its initiative?

Mr. Baker : I was in Lancashire on Friday and I met many people who were angry with Lancashire county council, whose expenditure has risen by 17 per cent.--a massive £123 million--with the result that the community charge figure will be very high. If the rating system had continued, the rates in Lancashire would have risen by 32 per cent. this year. I warmly congratulate the Conservative group on Lancashire county council on advancing proposals setting out in detail how they would reduce the community charge by £60 per person in a full year.

Dr. Cunningham : Is not the fixing of budgets for the education of our children, the care of elderly people, the provision of social services and the meeting of housing needs far too important a matter to be affected by arm-twisting, bullying and intimidation from the chairman of the Conservative party? Whatever happened to the concept of the poll tax bringing more accountability to local government? That idea seem to have gone out of the window now that Ministers and the chairman of the Tory party have been ringing up leaders of authorities to threaten them. Has the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster seen the denunciation by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy of the fictitious figures used by the Prime Minister in the House last week to manipulate public opinion? As he is talking about the effect of high poll tax figures, why does he not deal with the situation in his own county of Surrey?

Mr. Speaker : Order. The question is about Lancashire.

Dr. Cunningham : Why does not the right hon. Gentleman compare Lancashire with Surrey? Woking is 56 per cent. above the Government figure, Fareham 49 per cent., Eastleigh in Hampshire 48 per cent. and Dover in Kent 48 per cent. What is he telling his Tory constituents in Mole Valley?

Mr. Baker : I can tell the hon. Gentleman the difference between a Conservative-controlled authority and a Labour-controlled authority and I have not been ringing up the obvious Conservative councils. A Conservative authority looks for value for money and tries to find ways to reduce the community charge whereas a Labour authority looks for ways to increase expenditure. I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman has the brass neck to raise these questions. He is the author--the sole author, as I understand it--of the roof tax and local income tax. My constituents in Mole Valley want to know what they would pay under the Cunningham roof tax and local income tax. The hon. Gentleman announced his proposals with a great flourish of trumpets last year, but the shadow Cabinet panicked when it saw them and he was told to say nothing more about them. The Labour party will have to come clean by 3 May about its alternative to the community charge. It would be fundamentally dishonest for the Labour party to campaign without a specific alternative as electors would not know how they would be affected. If by 3 May the electors do not know how they will be affected, the Labour party will have been cynical, dishonest and hypocritical.

Column 14

York

65. Mr. Gregory : To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when he next intends to visit the Duchy's properties in York.

Mr. Baker : I plan to visit York on 1 May, although not in my capacity as the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

Mr. Gregory : In anticipation of my right hon. Friend's next visit to York, will he note the buoyant state of the economy there and that it is enjoying an unprecedented decline in unemployment in line with the national trend? Will he confirm that that is in stark contrast with the years when York, like the rest of the nation, was unfortunately under a Socialist administration?

Mr. Baker : I confirm what my hon. Friend has said. In the past year unemployment in Yorkshire has fallen by a fifth and in the past three years it has fallen by half. That will be welcomed by both sides of the House. I commend to the House the comments of the chairman of the Yorkshire and Humberside CBI who in November 1989 said :

"Business in the region is in much better shape to meet the challenges of the 1990s and beyond than anyone would have dared forecast at the beginning of this decade."

That is a tribute to the buoyancy of the economy in Yorkshire and to the policies that we have followed in the past 11 years.

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMISSION

Employees (Insurance Contributions)

70. Mr. Skinner : To ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission if he will make a statement on his recent correspondence with the hon. Member for Bolsover on insurance contributions paid by employees.

Sir Peter Hordern (Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission) : This is not a matter for the Public Accounts Commission strictly. I can confirm what I told the hon. Gentleman in correspondence. The Comptroller and Auditor General has significant doubts about the effectiveness of controls exercised by the Department of Social Security and the Inland Revenue acting on its behalf to ensure that employers have properly calculated and paid all contributions due to the national insurance fund. As a result, he has qualified his certificate for the 1988-89 national insurance fund account which is due to be published early in March. He has also told me that he intends to carry out a major study of this area, which would examine whether the Department's mechanisms for ensuring that contributions have been received from the maximum number of eligible persons operate in an economic and effective way.

Mr. Skinner : Will the hon. Gentleman tell the Comptroller and Auditor General that we are pleased that the investigation is going ahead? Will he also tell him to be aware that some companies say that they employ only a small number of people when in fact they have a larger number on the books?

Will the hon. Gentleman also ask the Comptroller and Auditor General to examine the multinational companies which pay extravagant salaries abroad but according to their returns to the Inland Revenue supposedly pay only

Column 15

Mickey Mouse wages here? Will he tell his right hon. Friends that introducing legislation and changing the rules so often provides many loopholes? Is it not time that there were more inspectors dealing with that issue rather than hounding one-parent families?

Sir Peter Hordern : The Comptroller and Auditor General is examining the system of controls at the Department of Social Security and the Inland Revenue. There is no evidence from his investigations to show that there is widespread abuse. If any such evidence comes to light, the Comptroller and Auditor General will report it to the House and I have no doubt that it will be examined by the Public Accounts Committee.

Mr. Dickens : Does my hon. Friend agree that 99.9 per cent. of British companies collect national insurance contributions and pay them to the Treasury in the proper way? Does he further agree that unscrupulous companies should be rooted out, booted out and taken to court?

Sir Peter Hordern : I do not know what the proportion is, but I agree with the second part of my hon. Friend's question.

Meetings

71. Mr. Allen : To ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission when the Public Accounts Commission last met ; and what subjects were discussed.

Sir Peter Hordern : As I informed the House in my reply to the hon. Gentleman on 15 January, the Commission last met on 12 December 1989. Among the subjects discussed at that meeting were the estimates for the National Audit Office and the Northern Ireland Audit Office for 1990-91, and the corporate plan for the National Audit Office to 1994-95.

Mr. Allen : Is the hon. Gentleman aware that one reason why the Comptroller and Auditor General is able to discover and investigate scandals such as the national insurance scandal is that he has, and must maintain, adequate levels of staff? Will he make every effort to ensure that the wage levels paid in the National Audit Office are at least comparable with, if not better than, those paid in the private sector so that the multi-million and possibly billion-pound scandals that have come to light will continue to be revealed to the House?

Sir Peter Hordern : Recruitment to the National Audit Office is proceeding well and the Comptroller and Auditor General is quite satisfied with that.

Mr. Campbell-Savours : Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that when the Commission last met it had before it the Comptroller and Auditor General's report on the House of Commons Refreshment Department? That report highlights the fact that the Refreshment Department has almost £2 million in reserve, yet it pays some of the lowest wages in the country to those employed in the Dining Rooms of the House. Is that not a matter

Mr. Speaker : Order. I am not sure that that is a matter for the Public Accounts Commission.

Mr. Campbell-Savours: It is a Commission report. Why cannot I ask my question without interruption?

Column 16

Mr. Speaker : These questions relate to the Public Accounts Commission, not the House of Commons Commission.

Mr. Campbell-Savours : It is a Commission report.

Sir Peter Hordern : I read the National Audit Office annual report with great care, but I can remember nothing about the kitchen committee's report in it. No doubt it is a matter that the hon. Gentleman will wish to raise with his right hon. Friends.

LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL

EC Directives

72. Mr. Teddy Taylor : To ask the Lord President of the Council over the last 12 months how many European Economic Commission directives emanating form the Commission were considered by the House before and after 10 o'clock ; and how many were not considered by the House at all.

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Geoffrey Howe) : All the legislative proposals issued bthe European Commission are considered by the Select Committee on European Legislation, which decides whether to recommend them for debate. Including non-legislative documents, 751 EEC documents were deposited in Parliament in 1989. A total of 96 documents were debated--32 before 10 pm, 40 after 10 pm, and 24 in Standing Committee.

Mr. Taylor : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that there is a major democratic problem when floods of legislation affecting all our constituencies pour out of Brussels but in many cases are not fully discussed by the House of Commons? Should not further action be taken to ensure that legislation affecting our constituents is properly discussed in the House before decisions are made in Brussels? Does my right hon. and learned Friend further agree that the worst solution of all would be to refer that flood of legislation to tame Committees?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : My hon. Friend must understand that delegated legislation, national or international, has long been a feature of parliamentary government, particularly unitary parliamentary government such as our own.

On Community legislation, the number of documents coming forward for approval or consideration by the House has not varied significantly in the past 10 years. The proportion debated depends upon the proportion recommended for further consideration by the Scrutiny Committee. That proportion has varied between 10 and 15 per cent., and the figure last year was in no way exceptional. I believe that all those recommended for consideration were debated. The Procedure Committee report that we are studying makes it clear that debates on such matters are normally held in time. We shall, of course, give further consideration to its recommendations.

Mr. Spearing : Does the Leader of the House agree that the significance of many of the documents, particularly many of the 90 that we discussed last year, is becoming much greater? Does he therefore agree in principle with the recommendation of the Procedure Committee that it

Column 17

would be better for the Select Committee on European Legislation to be able to put those important documents in a wider context? Does he agree with analogy that the EC Scrutiny Committee already has binoculars at its eyes but is asking the House to give it radar?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : Of course the Government attach importance to continuing proper scrutiny of legislation of this kind. That is why we are studying closely the recommendations of the Procedure Committee report, which found that the scrutiny machinery of this Parliament was at least as effective as that of any other member state. It is right that we should give detailed consideration to the Committee's report with a view to early implementation of any changes that the House agrees are necessary.

Mr. Rowe : As we get closer to the EC, which is entirely desirable in most respects, would not it ensure that a higher political priority were given to such important scrutiny if the power to initiate legislation came from Ministers rather than from the European Commission? Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that that would be a much better way to run the EC?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : My hon. Friend will understand that the process whereby legislation takes shape depends on the relationship between the Commission and the Council of Ministers. The Commission often takes on board proposals from various member states or Ministers. Those proposals, wherever they originate, are carefully considered by the Council before being subjected to consideration by the European Parliament as well as by national Parliaments.

Eastern European Parliamentarians

73. Mr. Winnick : To ask the Lord President of the Council if he has any plans to meet Members of Parliaments of Warsaw pact countries to discuss parliamentary and democratic procedures.

Sir Geoffrey Howe : I am happy to tell the hon. Gentleman that there has been a huge increase in contacts with parliamentarians and others in eastern Europe following the dramatic and most welcome developments there in the past few months. Naturally I have played a full part in that and I look forward to maintaining such contacts.

Mr. Winnick : How does the right hon. and learned Gentleman explain to those parliamentarians that while their countries are, we hope, beginning to establish the rule of law and parliamentary democracy, in Britain the Tory Government have taken away the right of many people working in local government to stand for election in another local authority, to stand for election to Parliament or to take part in any political activity? How can he justify his action of six years ago, when he took away the right of people to belong to a trade union if they happened to be working at GCHQ? Is it not odd that while east European countries are heading towards democracy, our democratic process is being undermined?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : The oddity is entirely in the hon. Gentleman's perception. The decisions taken by the Government in relation to trade union membership at GCHQ have been tested and upheld in many places. The

Column 18

decisions taken about the relationship between local government membership and party-political representation were strongly debated in this House and further debated in the other place. The conclusion that emerged was the result of proper consideration in both Houses of a democratic Parliament.

Mr. Knapman : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that people emerging from a Socialist paradise in the East are unlikely to want lessons on parliamentary democracy from Socialists in the West?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : I have noticed that they tend to look toward the Government for instruction in these matters.

Mr. Alton : Following the announcement last Thursday by the Secretary of State for Commonwealth and Foreign Affairs that funding would be available to political parties in this House which they would be able to make available to parties in eastern Europe, can the Leader of the House say how much money will be available? Bearing in mind that elections are already under way in eastern Europe, will he give us the timetable? Are the organisations that the Government have in mind similar to foundations such as the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung and the Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung in West Germany?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : The hon. Gentleman will realise that such help is being given in a number of different ways, ranging from the Inter- Parliamentary Union to the Great Britain/East Europe centre ; a know-how fund for Poland and other countries is also available. I will put the hon. Gentleman's question to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.

Mr. Nicholas Bennett : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it would be a good idea for people from eastern Europe to explain both to Socialists in this House and to the British public why they are getting rid of nationalisation, high taxation and a bureaucratic state and looking towards the British Government's privatisation policies as the way forward for a free society?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : I think that Conservative Members are certainly of one mind with my hon. Friend. The process of privatisation has been undertaken not just in eastern Europe but in countries around the world, following the example set by the Government of this country.

Dr. Cunningham : Welcome though the contacts with developing democracies in eastern Europe will be, will the Leader of the House say whether his colleagues in the Department of the Environment have advised the new democratic Governments to introduce more than 50 Acts of Parliament taking away powers from the local level and giving them to Ministers? Have they been advised to abolish the existing councils for their capital cities? How many requests has the Leader of the House had from eastern European Governments about the advantages of introducing a poll tax in their countries?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : One cannot but admire the one-track nature of the hon. Gentleman's mind. Certainly, one of the proposals that we commend to democratic countries in eastern Europe is for a sensible pattern of local government taxation such as exists in this country.

Column 19

Car Park (Car Washing)

74. Mr. Yeo : To ask the Lord President of the Council what representations he has received regarding the washing of hon. and right hon. Members' cars in the Members' car park.

Sir Geoffrey Howe : Following representations by the staff side of the House of Commons Whitley committee, the Accommodation and Administration Sub-Committee has confirmed that attendants in the underground car park may, by private arrangement, wash Members' cars out of duty hours.

Mr. Yeo : I am grateful to my right hon. and learned Friend for that answer, but is he aware that the valuable freedom of hon. Members to have their cars washed at their own expense in the Members' car park has recently been substantially curtailed? Knowing how extremely valuable and highly regarded that facility is, will he look into the matter again to see whether it is possible to make it easier rather than more difficult for Members to have their cars washed?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : My hon. Friend will understand that the matter was considered, no doubt with the detailed attention that it deserves, by the Accommodation and Administration Sub-Committee on 19 February. Its conclusion was arrived at on the basis that the service to which my hon. Friend refers is a voluntary service undertaken by private arrangement out of duty hours. It has been agreed by the authorities on that basis and will continue as such.

Column 20

Catering

76. Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will bring forward propals to amalgamate the catering departments of the Houses of Lords and Commons ; and if he will make a statement.

Sir Geoffrey Howe : I have no such plans.

Mr. Greenway : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that there could be savings in amalgamating the Refreshment Departments of the House of Lords and the House of Commons and that it would be beneficial as well as convivial for Members of both Houses to meet over meals? Does he agree that Members of this House would enjoy going to sit on the long benches in the House of Lords Dining Room, as much as the Lords would enjoy coming to the House of Commons Cafeteria?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : I am not so familiar as my hon. Friend obviously is with the wide range of facilities available in the other place.

Mr. Dickens : My right hon. and learned Friend will be.

Sir Geoffrey Howe : That is a pleasure to which many hon. Members from both sides of the House can look forward in the distant future. There are no doubt sensible reasons for considering a higher degree of co- operation between the catering Departments at both ends of the Palace of Westminster. However, historical and constitutional separations make that process of co-operation more than usually difficult.

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page