House of Commons Hansard Debates for 27 Mar 1991

JOINT COMMITTEE ON CONSOLIDATION, &c., BILLS Ordered,

That Ann Widdecombe and Sir Richard Body be discharged from the Joint Committee on Consolidation, &c. Bills and Mr. Spencer Batiste and Mr. Peter Temple-Morris be added to the Committee.-- [Mr. Goodlad.]

Column 1077

House of Commons Members' Fund

11.43 pm

Mr. Alfred Morris (Manchester, Wythenshawe) : I beg to move, That the whole or any part of the sums deducted or set aside in the current year from the salaries of Members of Parliament under section 1 of the House of Commons' Members' Fund Act 1939, and the whole or any part of the contribution determined by the Treasury for the current year under section 1 of the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1957, as amended by the House of Commons Members' Fund and Parliamentary Pensions Act 1981, be appropriated for the purposes of section 4 of the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1948, as amended by section 12 of the Parliamentary Pensions Etc. Act 1984, and section 7 of the Ministerial and other Pensions and Salaries Act 1991.

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Paul Dean) : Perhaps it will be for the convenience of the House to discuss also the following motion : That in pursuance of the provisions of section 3 of the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1948 and of section 2 of the House of Commons Members' Fund and Parliamentary Pensions Act 1981 the maximum annual amounts of the periodical payments which may be made out of the House of Commons Members' Fund under the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1939, as amended, and the annual rate of any payments made under section 1 of the said Act of 1981 shall be varied as from 1st April 1991, as follows :

(a) for paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the said Act of 1939, as amended there shall be substituted the following paragraph : 1. The annual amount of any periodical payment made to any person by virtue of his past membership of the House of Commons shall not exceed £3,237 or such sum as, in the opinion of the Trustees, will bring his income up to £5,952 per annum whichever is the less : Provided that if, having regard to length of service and need, the Trustees think fit, they may make a larger payment not exceeding £6, 231 or such sum as, in their opinion, will bring his income up to £8, 946 per annum, whichever is the less :'.

(b) for paragraph 2 of that Schedule there shall be substituted the following paragraph :

2. The annual amount of any periodical payment to any person by virture of her being a widow of a past Member of the House of Commons shall not exceed £1,626 or such sum as, in the opinion of the Trustees, will bring her income up to £4,341 per annum, whichever is the less :

Provided that if, having regard to her husband's length of service or to her need, the trustees think fit, they may make a larger payment not exceeding £3,114 or such sum as, in the opinion of the Trustees, will bring her income up to £5,829 per annum, whichever is the less :'.

(c) in paragraph 2A of that Schedule for the words the annual amount of any periodical payment' to the end of the paragraph, there shall be substituted the words :

the annual amount of any periodical payment made to any such widower shall not exceed £1,626 or such sum as, in the opinion of the Trustees, will bring his income up to £4,341 per annum, whichever is the less :

Provided that if, having regard to his wife's length of service or to his needs the Trustees think fit, they may make a larger payment not exceeding £3,114 or such sum as, in the opinion of the Trustees, will bring his income up to £5,829 per annum, whichever is the less : '.

(d) in section 2(1) of the said Act of 1981, for the words from the beginning to the end of paragraph (b) there shall be substituted the words :

the annual rate of any payments made under section 1 shall be-- (

Column 1078

(a) £1,884 if the payments are made to a past Member ; and (

(b) £942 if the payments are made to the widow or widower of a past Member'.

Mr. Morris : I propose the motions that appear on the Order Paper in my name and those of right hon. and hon. Members on both sides of the Chamber who share with me the responsibility, as managing trustees, of administering the House of Commons Members' fund.

The purpose of the first motion is to provide for an increase in the present levels of grants and payments which may be made under the Members' fund legislation. These were last revised in April 1990 and the proposal I make now is that they should be increased, from 1 April 1991, by approximately 10.9 per cent. in line with the increases recently approved for public service and state retirement pensions which will take effect from April.

Those who stand to benefit under the proposal are former colleagues who left the House before September 1964, and their surviving spouses. Unlike those of us serving in the House now, they do not qualify for a pension in respect of parliamentary service as of right.

Many of this fast-dwindling number are now in their nineties, often living in straitened circumstances, and have to cope with all the difficulties that come with advancing years. The modest extra financial help which this motion seeks to provide will, I am sure, ease some of their problems and be gratefully received.

I make no apology for once again asking right hon. and hon. Members to help the managing trustees trace any former Members, or dependants of former Members who have died, who may be in need of help from the fund. In 1990, with the help of parliamentary colleagues, we were able to make contact with, and give help to, nine former Members and dependants. Over Easter in their constituencies, I hope that it may be possible for Members of Parliament who have reason to believe that their predecessors could be helped by the fund, to establish their whereabouts and let us know the former Member's name and address. The cause is worth while, and I shall much appreciate the help any present Member can give in bringing former Members into contact with the fund.

The provisions for which I now seek approval are set out in detail in the motions on the Order Paper and may be briefly summarised. Sub-paragraph (a) deals with grants to ex-Members. It is proposed to increase the basic annual grant to £3,237 subject to an income limit, including the grant, of £5,952. In the case of ex-Members with longer service and in need, the grant may be increased to a maximum of £6, 231 subject to an income limit of £8,946.

Sub-paragraphs (b) and (c) deal with the provision for grants to widows and widowers of ex-Members. It is proposed to increase the basic annual grant to £1,626 subject to an income limit, including the grant, of £4,341. Similarly, in the case of widows and widowers of ex-Members who had longer service, and where there is need, the grant may be increased to a maximum of £3,114 subject to an income limit of £5,829 per annum.

Sub-paragraph (d) refers to "as of right" payments from the Members' fund to ex-Members who had 10 years' service before October 1964, and to widows and widowers of such Members, as provided for by the House of Commons Members' Fund and Parliamentary Pensions Act 1981. It is proposed to increase these annual payments

Column 1079

to £1,884 in the case of ex-Members and £942 in the case of widows and widowers. The additional annual cost of these increases is estimated to amount to £10,788.

The other resolution relates to section 4 of the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1948, as amended by section 7 of the Ministerial and other Pensions and Salaries Act 1991, which now authorises the trustees of the Members' fund to make

"such periodical or other payments as they think fit" to ex-Members, or their widows, widowers, or children of ex-Members,

"having regard to the circumstances of the persons to or in respect of whom the payments are to be made."

Section 4 of the 1948 Act, together with Section 1 of the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1957, as amended, provide that in any year, for the purpose of making such payments, the House of Commons may by resolution direct that the whole or any part of the amount contributed by Members, together with up to £22,000 of the Treasury's contribution in the year, can be appropriated. The total which may be appropriated at present under this provision is £37,600. However, in his speech on Second Reading of this year's Ministerial and other Pensions and Salaries Act on 31 January 1991, the Lord President gave in column 1149 a specific undertaking to make an additional £100,000 available to meet the costs of further discretionary awards to be made underSection 4.

At present, nine beneficiaries receive payments totalling £21,216 per annum under this section, and the monies to be appropriated are needed to continue these payments and to fund further cases which will arise.

I am sure that the motions will have the support of all right hon. and hon. Members, and I commend them to the House. In doing so, and as in previous years, I should like again most warmly to thank Jim Dobson, Tony Lewis, Mike Barram, Pam Hurford and their colleagues in the Fees Office for all the care with which they assist beneficiaries of the fund. I am told frequently how much their work is appreciated by those whom the fund exists to help and, as chairman of the trustees, I see at first hand the commitment and concern with which they work, day by day, in the service of our former colleagues, their widows and other dependants. They deserve the gratitude of the whole House.

11.52 pm

Mr. Ray Powell (Ogmore) : I should like to convey the appreciation of the House to my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe (Mr. Morris) and the others on the fund committee for their meticulous work on behalf of Members and ex-Members and their widows. Having been responsible for looking after the estates of a number of ex-Opposition Members after their death and considering the possibilities of pensions and other funding arrangements, I find it of great concern that, over the years, the House has not been giving widows, in particular, the benefits that they should have received. I should like to ask my right hon. Friend the number of recipients, as of right, under the motion.

I share my right hon. Friend's gratitude to Jim Dobson and the Fees Office staff for their work, but I am concerned that there is difficulty in contacting ex-Members or even the widows of ex-Members. Surely, if we were paying into a pension fund or any other fund outside the House of Commons and we left employment, our employers and the

Column 1080

people to whom we contribute our pension fund would be able to determine where we lived and how they could give us the benefit. It is not incumbent on Members to find out whether their predecessors or their widows are alive. It is the responsibility of the House to keep detailed information on the people who have served it in the past. I am positive that my right hon. Friend will consider this, so that he will be able to persuade his committee to ensure that, in future, the House has a proper record of those who have served the House, their addresses and their whereabouts if they move, so that the fund can be extended to them.

I welcome the extension and the increase in the benefits. That is long overdue. Perhaps the House could consider even more and better funding for the people concerned, particularly the widows of Members. This is a step towards giving them a reasonable income, but it is far less than Members' widows should expect after 20 or 25 years' service to the House. Members are away from their wives five days' a week and only home at weekends. That can go on for up to 25 years, and if they die their spouses deserve every consideration. It is high time the House considered that. I ask my right hon. Friend again to give the number who would receive benefits as of right.

11.56 pm

Mr. Frank Haynes (Ashfield) : I have the privilege of addressing the House on the subject of funds for those who have served in this place and for widows, too, who were referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for Ogmore (Mr. Powell).

We tend to concentrate far too much on affairs of state and to forget the important things that are buried underneath, such as the rights of Members of Parliament and their widows. My hon. Friend talked about man and wife, and some are lucky enough to be in this place together. It is not always a question of one being way up in the north and the other way down here in the south. The married couples who serve in this place are lucky people. Most Members who do not live in the south are separated from their spouses. It is important to ensure, not only tonight but in the future, that we deal properly with such matters.

I have a great friend back in Mansfield who is aged 95. He came into this House in 1941 and in 1966 he went to the other place. He is still a Member of the other place. But at the moment he is very poorly and he has been in hospital for a number of weeks. He benefited from the fund and it is important that he should. Many of our colleagues who have now passed on benefited from it when we did not have a proper pension fund. It helped people who had served this place for many years. Without such a fund, they would have received nothing.

It is important that we should think about that continuously and at the same time consider what we should do in the future. There is always argument about the amount of money available. At the moment, we are talking about our own parliamentary pension fund which has gone before the review board. That fund is alive with money and we should be making good use of it. The widows have had a raw deal for many years and it is our responsibility, not the Government's, to decide what should happen. That is what we should be doing. We should remember that.

Column 1081

As I said at the beginning, affairs of state appear to hide that kind of thing. We should look at the matter carefully and do the right thing. That is not only in the interests of the widows ; it is in our interests as well.

We pay into a pension fund to enjoy a decent pension when we retire. One can pay into a private pension outside, pay less and get more when one retires. It is scandalous. Therefore, we ought to study this matter properly.

I am leaving the House at the next election, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You will be leaving with me. We will enjoy a pension of sorts when we finish, but I hope that future Members of Parliament will benefit from the discussions that we are having in the House with a view to improving pension entitlements so that they are looked after properly when they leave. It is important that we should keep our eye on the matter and not forget it.

Finally, I must mention the wonderful staff in the Fees Office--they have been mentioned twice tonight. I do not want to mention any name in particular, but I know that, as regards the Fees Office, there is one important person in the Chamber at the moment. However, across yonder it is teamwork in our interests. One can go to the Fees Office at any time and they will help with any problem. As regards the fund, we must not forget that we are totally reliant upon them to do the job properly and they do it. They do a first-class job, and we must recognise that too.

In the final analysis, the guidance that the Fees Office get is dependent upon the trustees doing their job and representing Members of Parliament properly in this place as regards grants or pensions. However, we must remember that if the Fees Office staff do not have the resources in their hands they cannot do the job properly, or in the way that we would like them to do it. The proper resources should be there so that the trustees can do their job.

The trustees have done a first-class job and I thank them for it and ask them to continue. Let the wonderful people in the Fees Office get on with it on our behalf.

12.2 am

Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield) : I am always pleased to follow the hon. Member for Ashfield (Mr. Haynes). I endorse all that he has said, and all that the hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe (Mr. Morris) has said, about the skill, dedication, commitment and service of those people in the Fees Office, who do a wonderful job, not only for us as Members of Parliament, but in administering the pension and other funds on behalf of previous Members, their spouses, widows, widowers and other dependants.

I hope that you will permit me to pick up on one matter, Mr. Deputy Speaker --the way in which the House treats those people who are no longer here, who have retired or, sadly, have lost their seats. I have longed to say this, because I have spoken many times to the hon. Member for Wythenshawe, who shares my view, I think, but as a trustee is limited in what he can do.

I believe that the House deals in a miserly way with those who have served in this place, have committed themselves to it for many years, and have either retired or lost their seats.

The hon. Member for Ashfield, when speaking to those two motions, said that the pension fund was awash with

Column 1082

money. He did not go on to say that, as a result, the Government--that is, the Treasury--were seeking to reduce its contribution to the Members' fund, which is quite wrong and quite immoral. Those people who administer the fund, and the Government, acting on behalf of this place in making certain resources available, should deal more generously with Members who lose their seats or retire.

People who are living in very straitened circumstances--some in almost abject poverty--have been mentioned many times. As the hon. Member for Ogmore (Mr. Powell) said, it is sad that we have to seek to trace such people. We should know where they are and be able to help them. Given our modern information technology and communications systems, it is disgraceful that we should have to appeal to Members of Parliament to try to ensure that those who have given service to the House and the country can lead slightly more comfortable lives in their retirement. The right hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe (Mr. Morris) has already made that point.

I, too, pay tribute to the trustees. They do an excellent job, committing themselves for many hours to serving the House, past Members and their dependants. Without adequate resources, they cannot do the job that the House and the country expect for those who have served here. I warmly support the motions moved so succinctly by the right hon. Member for Wythenshawe, and I commend him for what he and his fellow trustees do.

I hope that, although few people are present at this late hour, the message will reach the Treasury : "Don't you dare reduce the resources." They should be maintained ; perhaps, indeed, they should be increased--as the hon. Member for Ashfield suggested--to enable us to provide reasonable pensions and other benefits, in a responsible manner, for those who have served here, and for their dependants when they have passed on. Otherwise, the House will not be doing itself a service, let alone those who have served it so well.

12.6 am

Mr. Alfred Morris : I very much appreciate the kind words of my hon. Friends the Members for Ogmore (Mr. Powell) and for Ashfield (Mr. Haynes) and of the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) about the work of the trustees. I know that my fellow trustees, on both sides of the House, will be grateful, too, for what they have said tonight.

I am extremely glad also that my own tribute to the staff of the Fees Office, who sustain our efforts as trustees, has been so strongly endorsed by everyone who has contributed to the debate. My hon. Friends the Members for Ogmore and for Ashfield spoke with all their customary and robust common sense. They were concerned about the financial circumstances of widows of former Members and I know their concern reflects anxiety felt by Members of all parties. The widows of the former Members of Parliament with whom we are dealing tonight are among the least fortunate of all widows whose husbands have served the House of Commons. They are the widows of Members who served here before the inception of the parliamentary contributory pension fund. The increases that I propose are modest, but are much needed by widows, many of whom are over 90 and live in straitened circumstances.

Column 1083

I must not stray tonight into the affairs of the fund in response to what has been said about the pensions payable to the widows of Members of Parliament in the current scheme. It is well known, however, that the managing trusteess of the PCPF have made clear to both the House and the Top Salaries Review Body our strong feeling that Members' widows should have a two-thirds pension. I hope that the pressure we have tried to exert will soon bear fruit. As the House knows, I am also chairman of the managing trustees of the parliamentary contributory pension fund.

I was asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Ogmore about as-of-right payments. They are made from the Members' fund to ex-Members who had 10 years' service before October 1964 and to widows and widowers of such Members, as provided for by the House of Commons Members' Fund and Parliamentary Pensions Act 1981. As of now, 38 ex-Members are recipients of as-of-right payments and 42 widows. The total therefore is 80. I hope that this answers my hon. Friend's point.

My hon. Friend and others have made a number of suggestions that are carefully noted. I shall look in particular at what has been said about keeping in touch with former Members. We are talking here in many cases about people who left the House more than 40 years ago. Information technology, about which the hon. Member for Macclesfield knows a great deal, was quite different then from what it is today. I hope that Members will help us, wherever they can, to fill the gaps in our information. We need to know of more of our ex-colleagues who can benefit from the House of Commons Members' fund. If any hon. Member who is here tonight, or anyone reading the report of this debate, can put us in touch with anyone we can help, as managing trustees of the fund, we shall be only too delighted. We all pay, as Members of Parliament, into the fund. All of us want to make absolutely certain that the help that it can provide is provided to those who are most in need.

Again, I thank my hon. Friends and the hon. Member for Macclesfield for their valuable contributions to the debate. All the points they made will be very carefully considered by the managing trustees. Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That the whole or any part of the sums deducted or set aside in the current year from the salaries of Members of Parliament under section 1 of the House of Commons' Members' Fund Act 1939, and the whole or any part of the contribution determined by the Treasury for the current year under section 1 of the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1957, as amended by the House of Commons Members' Fund and Parliamentary Pensions Act 1981, be appropriated for the purposes of section 4 of the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1948, as amended by section 12 of the Parliamentary Pensions Etc. Act 1984, and section 7 of the Ministerial and other Pensions and Salaries Act 1991.

Resolved,

That in pursuance of the provisions of section 3 of the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1948 and of section 2 of the House of Commons Members' Fund and Parliamentary Pensions Act 1981 the maximum annual amounts of the periodical payments which may be made out of the House of Commons Members' Fund under the House of Commons Members' Fund Act 1939, as amended, and the annual rate of any payments made under section 1 of the said Act of 1981 shall be varied as from 1st April 1991, as follows :

(a) for paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the said Act of 1939, as amended there shall be substituted the following paragraph :

Column 1084

1. The annual amount of any periodical payment made to any person by virtue of his past membership of the House of Commons shall not exceed £3,237 or such sum as, in the opinion of the Trustees, will bring his income up to £5,952 per annum whichever is the less : Provided that if, having regard to length of service and need, the Trustees think fit, they may make a larger payment not exceeding £6, 231 or such sum as, in their opinion, will bring his income up to £8, 946 per annum, whichever is the less :'.

(b) for paragraph 2 of that Schedule there shall be substituted the following paragraph :

(c) in paragraph 2A of that Schedule for the words the annual amount of any periodical payment' to the end of the paragraph, there shall be substituted the words :

(d) in section 2(1) of the said Act of 1981, for the words from the beginning to the end of paragraph (b) there shall be substituted the words :

the annual rate of any payments made under section 1 shall be-- (

(a) £1,884 if the payments are made to a past Member ; and (

(b) £942 if the payments are made to the widow or widower of a past Member'.

PETITION

Crown Post Office (Maesteg)

12.12 am

Mr. Ray Powell (Ogmore) : I wish to present a petition from my constituents residing in Maesteg in the Ogmore constituency and in the borough of Ogwr expressing great dismay and concern that the Crown post office at Maesteg, serving a population of some 25,000, should be downgraded to that of an agency office without any guaranteee that the provision of the present services will remain available and that the staff employed will enjoy the present nationally agreed pay and conditions of work. The 5,000 signatories also clearly state that this will not be in the long-term interests of the people of Maesteg.

Wherefore your petitioners pray that your honourable House do urge Right Honourable Peter Lilley, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, to intervene in the proposal to downgrade the Maesteg Crown post office to an agency office.

And your petitioners will, as in duty bound, ever pray. To lie upon the Table.

Column 1085

Timeshare Promotion Schemes

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.-- [Mr. Boswell.]

12.13 am

Mr. David Amess (Basildon) : I very much hope that the subject that I shall draw to the House's attention this evening will be of general interest. It raises certain principles upon which we may wish to reflect. Having discussed the subject with colleagues, I believe that there are few hon. Members who have not yet received an envelope from America suggesting that detail of good news are to follow. I will give some details of the good news shortly.I recognise that business is very tough for many people. Competition within various sectors is extremely keen and advertising has an important role to play, but I deplore the explosion of junk mail dropping on to our mats, the clear objective of which is to encourage individuals to participate in timeshare promotion schemes.

The whole question was drawn to my attention by the good endeavours of a number of constituents, who complained about the volume of unsolicited mail and their disappointment at later not receiving the prizes to which they believed that they were entitled when they opened the envelopes.

When I and my good wife received letters from America a few weeks ago, we opened them and were greeted with the glad tidings that we had both won cars. The company which sent us the news is a marketing organisation based in Sheffield. [H on. Members :-- "Name it".] When we opened the envelopes, we were told that we were gold star winners and that we had both won cars. Naturally we were excited. During our animated conversation, my wife decided that she would have a white car and I decided to choose a blue car.

After making a telephone call and determining that the good news was indeed correct, I thought that I would be cautious and put pen to paper. I received an interesting reply from the marketing company. [H on. Members :-- "Name it."] I am under pressure from my hon. Friends to name the company.

I quote from the letter :

"I was very surprised to learn that you went as far as discussing what colour Ford Fiesta you would choose and how excited your household were that morning. I did, however, detect a certain tongue in cheek tone, and if you were truly under the impression that you had both won a Ford Fiesta, which I seriously doubt, I should like to bring your attention to two main points of the letter. Firstly, the opening line begins, If you bring the number', and secondly, in the sentence below the first box section it clearly indicates that this is purely an illustration.

Your request finally to take advantage of my offer of contacting Mr. Nokes and Mr. Aspindle is purely a figure of speech, but if the purpose of contacting them is to verify whether or not they were genuinely awarded motor cars, I can assure you that written and photographic evidence has been submitted to the Office of Fair Trading and Advertising Standards Authority. I am sure that, put in their position, you would not want to be hounded by countless calls from doubting members of the public as to the authenticity of the claims."

What a lot of codswallop, dishonest in the extreme. Judging by the letter, the company is not even ashamed of its activities. [ Hon. Members-- : "Name it."] Responding to the pressure of my hon. Friends, I have substantial documentary evidence of the veracity of what I have said.

Column 1086

I and my wife then attended another presentation to which we had been invited, at fairly seedy premises in Leicester square. After being served tea in plastic containers we were, as it were, counselled. Once our credentials were established, we watched a film of nauseating crassness about the wonders of timeshare. We were then assigned a South African gentleman. He assumed that our appetites had been whetted and it was clear that he hoped that he would be able to make a sale. He inquired my occupation. When I told him that I was a Member of this good House, he turned somewhat pale, or paler than I look now. Putting it mildly, he could not wait to get shot of me. We were then ushered to the door, where we were presented with our card. Those at the door went through the procedure of checking our lucky number with the card whereby I would collect my car or whatever. It will come as a great surprise to the House when I say that I did not win a car, nor did I win a motor scooter or money. Instead, I was presented with a plastic alarm clock and a delightfully and exotically described Queen Anne entertaining set. The entertaining set would not entertain one person, let alone a gathering of guests. I have recently received more invitations. The House will be interested to know that one of them was from the same company in Sheffield, which clearly had not crossed me off its mailing list. The company tells me that I am again a gold card winner and that I am guaranteed to win either a Volvo sport, a sport boat with outboard motor or £2,000 in cash. I am pleased to be able to tell the House that I have made an arrangement to attend the presentation in a fortnight's time. That is why I am resisting pressure to name the company.

I have also received a letter from a trading company based in Bradford, in which I am told that I am a gold card winner. I am told also--I am indeed lucky--that I have won a 1991 Ford Escort 1.6 Ghia or a Bahamas cruise, or a £1,000 cash prize. I shall be attending that company's presentation in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Sir R. McCrindle) in about a fortnight's time.

Finally, I have received a card from Dallas, Texas. It tells me that I am yet again a gold card winner, not a silver or bronze winner. It seems that I shall receive either a Ford Fiesta or an Electra sport boat. If my right hon. Friend the Member for Southend, West (Mr. Channon) were still in his place, I am sure that he would be able to accommodate me with some water on which to enjoy the pleasures of a motor boat. I am in something of a dilemma when it comes to establishing where I shall be able to cruise with my wife and, on reflection, I have not made an appointment with that company : I do not wish to be greedy and I wish some prizes to be in reserve for future winners.

I know that the two organisations with which I have made appointments will be delighted by the news that I am able to give the House tonight, which is that I shall be attending both presentations complete with a camera crew. I know that the crew will wish to film me as I drive down the motorway in my new car and as my wife sails down the Thames in our new sport boat. The presentation will be completed, of course, by pigs flying.

I have two secretaries who job-share, one of whom has recently related her good fortune. She received a letter from one of the timeshare companies, in which she was told that she had won a 22-inch colour televison or £2,000, or an attractive luggage set, a car or a camera. She was told in the letter that she and her husband--she is married to

Next Section

Home Page