House of Commons Hansard Debates for 21 Oct 1991

Mr. Alison : I take careful note of what the hon. Lady has said and I will certainly convey to the Church Commissioners her views about the need to return to the £1 million grant. However, she will bear two points in mind. The church urban fund this year will, from its own resources, be able to maintain the level of its grants even in default of the Church Commissioners' £1 million, because it already has a substantial income. The money that we would otherwise give to the church urban fund this year will go to clergy stipends, and will especially be slanted and directed towards the poorest inner city parishes. What the church urban fund loses, the poorer parishes get through the maintenance of their stipends.

Clergy Stipends

29. Mr. Bowis : To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, what provision is made for public consultation over clergy stipends.

Mr. Alison : The Commissioners, as central stipends authority, consult dioceses at least once a year about future stipend levels and take account of their views when making recommendations. A report is submitted annually to the General Synod which may debate the report if it chooses.

Mr. Bowis : Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is considerable public concern that for many family men

Column 631

the level of stipend is inadequate? At the same time, many people share the view of the noble prelate the Archbishop of Canterbury that perhaps there should not be total security of tenure in parishes. Will my right hon. Friend encourage widespread consultation to see whether there cannot be a new system of payment of stipends to take on board those two points, perhaps by using some form of incentive payments?

Mr. Alison : I take careful note of what my hon. Friend has suggested. The notion of productivity in the cure of souls is difficult to administer fully, humanely and consistently. He will have noticed the level of stipends and the supplementary payments that are available, thanks to the Church Commissioners' successful administration of their funds in recent years. There has been a 75 per cent. increase in the level of stipends in real terms, greatly outpacing the rate of inflation. There is more land to be possessed and more to be done. We will do our best to follow through my hon. Friend's suggestion.

HOUSE OF COMMONS COMMISSION

Toilet and Changing Room Facilities

33. Mr. Janner : To ask the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, representing the House of Commons Commission, what steps the new Director of Works will take to improve staff toilet and changing room facilities.

Mr. A. J. Beith (on behalf of the House of Commons Commission) : The Director of Works, who is a member of the department of the Serjeant at Arms, took up his post in July, but he will not become directly responsible for the parliamentary works programme until it is transferred to the Commission from the Department of the Environment next April. In the meantime, I will ensure that any concerns that the hon. and learned Gentleman has are made known to the relevant authorities.

Mr. Janner : Does the hon. Gentleman agree that many of the facilities for staff members in this Palace are wholly unworthy and in many cases disgusting? Is he aware, for example, that the waiting staff changing rooms have been moved to the former office of the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown), the leader of his party, who I understand has moved out? None the less, there is no security and nowhere for the staff to lock away their clothes. They are not even allowed to have keys to the door. Will the hon. Gentleman look into the matter and try to arrange for our staff to have the facilities to which they would be entitled anywhere else?

Mr. Beith : The Commission is well aware of the need. New changing and rest facilities have been made available at No. 1 Parliament street, where those criticisms will not apply. I will look at the specific points raised by the hon. and learned Gentleman and ensure that they are brought to the attention of the appropriate authorities.

Mr. Dickens : Does the hon. Gentleman feel that if the toilet facilities in the House of Commons are sufficient for the hundreds of people who visit the House of Commons each day, they should by the same token be sufficient for the staff who work in the building?

Column 632

Mr. Beith : Those matters do not fall within the responsibility of the Commission until the transfer of the works next April. It will be our intention that there should be adequate and excellent facilities for staff members and visitors.

Refreshment Department

34. Mr. Skinner : To ask the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, representing the House of Commons Commission, what recent reviews have been undertaken of the payments and conditions of service of staff of the Refreshment Department ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Beith : Pay reviews for the non-industrial and industrial staff of the Department took place on 1 April and 1 July respectively, and pay increases for both groups of staff have been implemented recently in line with civil service pay agreements. The Establishments Office of the House has reached the final stage of negotiations with the relevant unions on the introduction of a simplified grading and pay structure for non-industrial grades, which will affect a small percentage of Refreshment Department staff. In addition, consultations have proceeded along similar lines for the industrial grades. The Commission has recently agreed proposals put forward by the Board of Management, and has authorised the Establishments Office to commence negotiations with the Hotel and Catering Union.

Mr. Skinner : Does the hon. Gentleman accept that when the £3.40 barrier was broken for the hourly rate paid to House of Commons refreshment staff, no one was sacked and, incredibly, more staff have been employed since then? Will those staff be treated in the same way as Members of Parliament when the next review is carried out? Will they be awarded pay rises of no less than 6.5 per cent., and when their pensions are calculated, will the Commission ensure that those pensions are in line with the recommendations of the Top Salaries Review Body, which is so embarrassed about the 60 per cent. pension increase awarded to some top civil servants that it has postponed the increase until after the general election? Will the hon. Gentleman guarantee that staff will receive the same increase, and that they will receive it before the election?

Mr. Beith : It is quite some time since the House broke through the £3.40 barrier to which the hon. Gentleman referred. As for pensions, staff--unlike Members--receive non-contributory pensions, along with a series of other benefits, which makes it difficult to compare their terms with those operating outside the House. A package containing a number of improvements is, however, currently the subject of negotiation.

Mr. Charles Wardle : Bearing in mind the number of people who work in the Refreshment Department and elsewhere in the Palace of Westminster, and the number of visiting officials from Government Departments--not to mention the number of right hon. and hon. Members--what can the hon. Gentleman do to promote the idea of establishing a mini-supermarket on the premises? Given the hours worked by all employees in the Palace, it is sometimes very difficult for them to find their way to a shop to buy essential supplies.

Column 633

Mr. Beith : The hon. Gentleman's interesting suggestion does not arise out of this question.

Disabled Employees

35. Mr. Corbyn : To ask the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, representing the House of Commons Commission, how many people employed by the Commission are registered disabled ; and what proprtion this is of total employees.

Mr. Beith : Of the total number of staff employed by the House of Commons, eight--that is, 0.7 per cent. of the total--are registered as disabled. The Commission's policy with regard to the employment of disabled persons is set out in its annual report of 1981-82, and--together with a summary of the positive action taken by management to increase the recruitment of disabled staff--was printed in the answer given on 13 June 1991 to a written question to me from the hon. Member for Paisley, South (Mr. McMaster).

Mr. Corbyn : Is that not a most unsatisfactory reply, and is not the situation disgraceful? Legislation suggests that a minimum of 3 per cent. registered disabled should be employed. There is no reason on earth why, having passed that legislation, the House cannot implement it.

The hon. Gentleman has said that a statement about a positive action programme was made in 1981-82. That was 10 years ago, and an amazing total of eight people with disabilities are now working in the building. That is a disgrace. I urge the Commission to consider this as a matter of urgency, and to increase the number of vacancies for people with disabilities, providing a model for the rest of the country and demonstrating that we do not believe that those who suffer from disabilities are unable to work gainfully.

Mr. Beith : The numbers that I gave did not include all who work in the building : the staff of the Property Srvices Agency were not part of the staff of the Commission.

The authorities have taken positive action beyond the 1981 statement to ensure that disabled persons are aware that applications from them would be welcome. Measures include a statement to that effect in all advertisements, encouraging disabled people to state whether they are registered ; keeping close links with the disablement resettlement officers, and organisations representing disabled people, to which all job vacancies are sent ; and facilitating the placement of disabled students for work experience. Disabled applicants will normally be shortlisted for interview if they are appropriately qualified. We are anxious to improve the figure as, I know, are many other employers.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

Annunciator System

36. Mr. Butler : To ask the Lord President of the Council if he intends to upgrade the annunciator system.

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John MacGregor) : There are as yet no firm proposals toupgrade the annunciator system, but the first step has been taken. During the summer

Column 634

recess, a consultant has been investigating the requirements for a cable network covering the entire Palace, which would provide hon. Members with information technology facilities but could also carry a modernised annunciator system. His report is expected to be presented before the end of the year.

Mr. Butler : Is not the technology for the annunciator system nearly a quarter of a century old? When we have a new system, will it be able to take an audio feed from the Chamber?

Mr. MacGregor : I believe that it is nearly a quarter of a century old. However, it was decided a little while ago that as the system was still working satisfactorily it did not make sense to change it outside the context of an examination of a cable network for the House as a whole. We have therefore taken the first steps in that regard, and the House will recall that the matter was debated in July 1991. Shortly after that debate, the House of Commons Commission gave the necessary approval for the consultancy study. That is now proceeding and we shall progress to the next stage after that.

Dr. Cunningham : May I strongly support the reply of the Leader of the House to the hon. Member for Warrington, South (Mr. Butler)? We should not waste money on an outdated annunciator system when we need to recable the House so that hon. Members can have access to information systems, data bases and as many television channels as we decide appropriate. I hope that we would decide that it was appropriate to have the live feed from the House as well.

Mr. MacGregor : The hon. Gentleman knows that I agree with him about how we should proceed on that matter. He will be aware that after the consultancy study the next stage is to set up a specialist working party to draw up the specifications for the interfaces required to produce a list of approved computers. The other matters can also be considered.

Televising the House

37. Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Lord President of the Council how many complaints he has received from members of the public and hon. Members regarding the televising of the House.

Mr. MacGregor : I have received a few letters from members of the public making general comments, but I am not aware of any complaints about the way in which the televising operation itself has been carried out within the House during the current Session.

Mr. Banks : Televising the House of Commons is one bit of television output about which the Prime Minister does not have to write a letter of cringing apology to someone because it has, of course, been so successful. Following what the right hon. Gentleman said in reply to the previous question, when shall we have television from gavel to gavel so that people can tune in to the debates that they want to watch rather than the debates chosen for them by broadcasting journalists?

Mr. MacGregor : I agree with the hon. Gentleman that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has been extremely successful in the House in the way that he comes over on television. The hon. Member for Newham,

Column 635

North-West (Mr. Banks) will be aware that the Select Committee on Broadcasting, &c. hoped that a continuous service operated by United Artists would be available from this autumn. There have been technical and legal problems with the Marco Polo satellite, but it is hoped that live continuous coverage of the proceedings of the House will be available from the Marco Polo satellite to cable subscribers in the new year as soon as the problems have been overcome.

Mr. Simon Coombs : I support what hon. Members have said about the need for live television coverage to be provided in the offices of hon. Members. When does my right hon. Friend expect the consultant's report to be available to him and, in due course, to the House?

Mr. MacGregor : We hope that the consultant's report to which I referred earlier will be available towards the end of the year--probably by the end of November.

Building Work

38. Mr. Janner : To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will make a statement on the forthcoming transfer of responsibility for building work in the Palace of Westminster.

Mr. MacGregor : Following the appointment of the Director of Works in July, good progress is being made to set up the new organisation which will assume responsibility for works services.

Mr. Janner : Will the Lord President of the Council be kind enough to arrange for a survey and census of the hazards in this building to elderly and infirm people who use the House? Meanwhile, will he use his powers at least to conjure up some railings for the stairs leading down from Westminster Hall to the interview rooms, down which to the right hon. Gentleman's knowledge an elderly, charming and kindly peer recently fell and was very lucky not to be severely injured?

Mr. MacGregor : I will certainly arrange for that particular matter to be looked into. The hon. and learned Gentleman is aware that we are about to undertake a major study with regard to access for the disabled, and that will include some of the points to which he referred.

Office Allowance

40. Mr. Hind : To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will make a statement on his plans to review the parliamentary office allowance.

Mr. MacGregor : As I announced in a written answer on 25 July 1991, I wrote to Sir David Nickson, chairman of the Top Salaries Review Body, on 24 July, asking him to conduct a review of the office costs allowance. Sir David has since replied, agreeing to produce a report by the middle of February.

Mr. Hind : My right hon. Friend will be aware that many hon. Members feel that they are short-changing their constituents because of their lack of resources, particularly in dealing with the large number of letters and constituency problems that they receive. Will my right hon. Friend put his weight behind the inquiry to ensure

Column 636

that more research facilities will be available by way of additional cash and help in dealing with the large number of matters that we are now asked to sort out?

Mr. MacGregor : I put my weight behind having the review undertaken so that all those matters could be looked at by the TSRB--including, of course, hon. Members' increased work load. My hon. Friend will know, however, that the TSRB wishes to conduct a comprehensive survey of hon. Members in relation to their use of staff, office costs and their views on the allowance, which would clearly include the points that my hon. Friend has raised. I am sure, therefore, that he will wish to make his views known to the TSRB.

Mr. Ian Bruce : Will the House authorities look carefully at the possibility of providing a special allowance for Members who like to keep their staff in their constituencies, in addition to the office costs allowance which is currently paid? That would have the double effect of paying for facilities in constituencies and taking pressure off accommodation in London, so we might solve two problems with one stone.

Mr. MacGregor : My hon. Friend may wish to put that point to the TSRB, together with his reasons for it. It would, of course, be for the TSRB to make recommendations.

Palace Tours

41. Mr. Simon Coombs : To ask the Lord President of the Council what is his estimate of the number of people who toured the Palace of Westminster last year ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. MacGregor : I am advised that in 1990 the estimated total number of visitors to the Palace of Westminster in Members' parties was 112,265. In addition, 6,720 schoolchildren took part in tours as part of the autumn visits programme organised by the education unit.

Mr. Coombs : Has my right hon. Friend had an opportunity to consider the point that I raised with him in the summer--that greater encouragement should be given to allowing people who are not connected with Members of Parliament to visit the Palace during the summer recess?

Mr. MacGregor : I indicated in my reply to my hon. Friend during the summer some of the difficulties involved, particularly those of a security nature, and the various hoops that would have to be gone through The position has not changed.

Mr. Cryer : Will the Leader of the House do something about a point of order that I raised before the summer recess? I refer to the provision of a room in which disabled visitors to the House can relax. When I took a party of blind students around the House, they were provided with absolutely no facilities at all. It is disgraceful that they cannot be taken anywhere for a cup of tea, they cannot be allowed to sit down anywhere, and there is no room for them. Groups of blind students have to be pushed to one side to allow rich pickings from the corporate entertainment in private dining rooms. It is about time that practice stopped and proper facilities were provided.

Mr. MacGregor : The whole House will be aware of the pressure on accommodation in the Palace. The hon.

Column 637

Gentleman's point is for the successor to the Accommodation and Administration Sub-Committee to consider if he would like to put it to it.

Terrace Marquee

42. Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Lord President of the Council if he has any plans to seek to retain the marquee on the terrace all the year round ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. MacGregor : There are no plans at present to keep the terrace pavilion in operation for the whole year. Any permanent construction would need planning permission from Westminster city council and the approval of the Royal Fine Art Commission and English Heritage. It is unlikely that the terrace pavilion, while appropriate for its present use, would be considered a suitable permanent structure.

Mr. Greenway : Does my right hon. Friend accept that, even if planning permission would be hard to come by, the

Column 638

terrace pavilion is a useful facility he should explore ways in which it can be maintained all the year round in view of its popularity and the demand for it?

Mr. MacGregor : My hon. Friend is certainly right about the demand for it. The facilities have been well received and have been heavily booked by hon. Members. Having the pavilion all the year round, which was examined by the Service Committee in the past, would involve problems at times of year when it is not currently used. I refer to problems of wear and tear, and possibly even loss of the whole facility. Maintenance and refurbishment would have to be done on site, too, and it is felt that that is more effectively done elsewhere. However, it is a matter that the Services Committee, or its successor under the Ibbs proposals, could bear in mind.

Mr. Dick Douglas (Dunfermline, West) : On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker : I will take the statement first.

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page