House of Commons Hansard Debates for 25 Jun 1992

Column 385

Fishing Incident (Scilly Isles)

3.30 pm

Mr. David Harris (St. Ives) (by private notice) : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement on the action by French fishermen against Cornish fishermen and their nets off the Scilly Isles last night. [Interruption.]

Madam Speaker : Order. Will hon. Members who are leaving please do so quietly? We have a lot of business before us today and the Minister is waiting to respond to the private notice question.

The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. David Curry) : The British fishing vessel, St. Uny, reported anincident between British netters and French trawlers at 1750 BST yesterday. The incident was reported to Falmouth Coastguard as taking place in a position 16 miles north-west of the Isles of Scilly. The coastguard requested that the fishery protection vessel HMS Brecon be sent to the area at 1830 BST. That was confirmed by the inspectorate duty officer at 1900 hours. At 1830 BST, the British fishing vessel Britannia IV advised the coastguard that it was being harassed by a number of French trawlers. Two of those vessels were identified as the Concarneau-registered Rhapsody and Larche.

The British vessels claim that the French vessels deliberately towed through their gear and, when the St. Uny approached the Larche to advise the position of the nets, it was pelted with lumps of metal and pieces of chain. HMS Brecon arrived at the scene at 2 o'clock this morning but by that time the vessels had left the area. There have been a number of similar incidents previously, the most recent of which was just four days ago. On each occasion the French vessels were from Concarneau, and the Rhapsody was identified in an earlier incident.

The British vessels are fishing with bottom set tangle nets. It is reported, but not confirmed, that at least one of the British vessels is fishing an area of approximately 10 square miles. The British vessels have claimed that there has been extensive damage to their gear but there are happily no reports of any injuries or damage. We shall take statements from the British vessels as soon as they arrive in their home ports. The Britannia and the Sardia Louise are back in Newlyn and we shall seek details today. We have just received new reports of a further incident involving the St. Uny and the Larche. We are investigating it urgently and HMS Brecon is on the scene and has orders to board the French vessel. That will take place within the hour.

Two hours ago, I spoke to the French Fisheries Minister, Mr. Charles Josselin, and expressed very forcibly the anger of British fishermen and my own anger at repeated incidents involving French vessels--often the same ones and involving the same English vessels--in these waters.

Mr. Josselin vigorously condemned the behaviour of the French boats. He will hold an inquiry to establish the facts once the boats are back in port, and if the allegations are confirmed he has promised very firm action. In particular, he indicated that two sanctions could be taken in the event of the allegations being substantiated : first, economic sanctions in the shape of compensation for loss

Column 386

of earnings and replacement or repair of gear ; secondly, sanctions in the shape of the withdrawal of the captains' tickets. He asked me to send urgently all the evidence about the incidents and estimates of the losses sustained. The first details have already been sent. This is a violent and outrageous incident. The British Government will sustain pressure on the French Government to make sure that their vessels are brought to book.

Mr. Harris : I thank my hon. Friend for that full statement and for the prompt action taken by Her Majesty's Government. Is he aware of the burning anger felt, particularly by Cornish fishermen, at the latest series of deplorable incidents, especially as they come at the end of a long line of similar outrages by some French vessels? Will he keep up the pressure on the French Government in the knowledge that it is only they who can ensure that this totally unacceptable behaviour is stamped on firmly? Will he ensure that the fishery protection vessel remains on station as long as there is any threat of further incidents, and that fishery protection will be intensified if there are any more such events? Will he welcome and support the action taken by the National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations and the Cornish Fish Producers Organisation in establishing a sensible working arrangement with French fishermen, particularly those from the port of Concarneau?

Mr. Curry : Yes, I will. It is important that we do the maximum to sort out such problems bilaterally. I can assure my hon. Friend that the fishery protection vessel will remain on station while there is a risk. The district is also under aerial surveillance. It is important that the French discipline their fishing vessels. I shall maintain pressure on the French Government. I am as aware as my hon. Friend is that the incident was the last in a long sequence of clashes involving not merely French vessels, and we must bring such incidents to an end.

Mr. Paul Tyler (North Cornwall) : Is the Minister aware that the fishing fleets of Cornwall and other parts of the United Kingdom will be concerned to ensure that there is effective prevention, not simply effective enforcement? Is the Minister aware that there was a considerable delay between the first call from the fishing boats involved and the arrival of HMS Brecon? Will he assure the House that, during the United Kingdom's presidency of the Council of Ministers, the most effective steps will be taken to ensure that, if one member country is unable to deal effectively with such a scandal, the other countries will be in a position to take action?

Are any of the alleged offences extradictable? As it is an open secret that the Ministry is currently considering whether to continue the contract for fishery protection with the Royal Navy, will he confirm that the present conflict will not encourage the view that a privatised service would do the job better?

Madam Speaker : Order. Before the Minister responds, may I make a plea to the House? A number of hon. Members are interested in the subject, so if each Member could ask just one question of the Minister, we could proceed quickly.

Mr. Curry : The Royal Navy vessel was on the scene quickly, but, as a matter of common sense, it must be obvious that we cannot patrol every square mile of the

Column 387

ocean all the time--there are not enough Royal Navy vessels to do that. As for market testing, we are obliged to test that we receive value for money from all the services that we commission--that is now taking place. We will not make a decision that means that we do not receive a degree of fishery protection at least as good as the present service. We are finding out the facts of the incident from the crews of the French and British vessels so that the French Minister can be given the means to fulfil his promise. It is absolutely essential that member states discipline their vessels over such incidents, as we do.

Mr. Michael Jopling (Westmorland and Lonsdale) : In the event of those allegations being substantiated, could they lead to the arrest of the French fishing vessels which have been partaking in those dreadful incidents? Will my hon. Friend give an undertaking that, if that is so, those vessels will be arrested and, with the assistance of continued aerial surveillance, their skippers will be brought to the courts?

Mr. Curry : I gave my right hon. Friend the assurance that, when we can catch vessels and their crews who are guilty of an offence for which we have the powers to charge them, we will not hesitate to bring charges.

Mr Austin Mitchell (Great Grimsby) : Does not this incident, paralleled as it is by similar outrages in the North sea on the part of Dutch beamers--particularly perpetrated on Grimsby vessels and their gear-- show how crazy it would be to consider contracting out the fishery protection service?

Mr. Curry : We have to deliver protection to our fishing vessels. There are four fishery protection services : the aerial service in Scotland, the maritime service in Scotland, the aerial service in England and Wales, and the Navy. Three of those four are carried out by private contracted vessels entirely satisfactorily. That is not a reason to change ; it does mean that we have to confirm whether we are getting the best value for money and the best protection that we can deliver to our fishermen. That is what we are doing--nothing more, nothing less.

Mrs. Jacqui Lait (Hastings and Rye) : Does my hon. Friend accept that the fishermen of Hastings and Rye are just as concerned as the fishermen in the western approaches about this depredation by the French? Will he welcome with me the French insistence that they will take sanctions against those who perpetrate these incidents--and ensure that they will apply also to fishermen along the French coast opposite England?

Column 388

Mr. Curry : The French were fishing where they had a right to fish-- there was no question of their fishing there because of the derogation. They were fishing in international waters that come under the United Kingdom supervision framework. Of course, I accept that my hon. Friend's fishermen constituents are concerned about this. We are in the business of protecting all British fishermen. There have been repeated incidents, some of them between Englishmen and Cornishmen. The sensible thing to do is to sort out the matter as between friends and by gentleman's agreement--but if we cannot, we will have to ensure that we deliver protection. We will do so.

Mr. Elliot Morley (Glanford and Scunthorpe) : The House will welcome the firm response from the French Minister, but we want not firmness of response but action to resolve such conflicts. Bearing in mind the violence of such conflicts and the threats to fishermen at sea, will the Minister reconsider his proposals for privatising fisheries protection? Does he agree that the Royal Navy commands considerable authority and respect ; and that undermining that authority while fishing stocks decline--that is likely to lead to further conflicts--will put at risk our fishermen at sea?

Mr. Curry : No, I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's premise. A significant part of our fishery protection is already carried out by private contractors, and we receive no complaints about its efficiency. We will therefore be testing the market to determine whether we get best value for money. We are nowhere near making a decision yet, but whatever decision is taken, it will deliver full fishery protection to our vessels. That is the whole point of the exercise.

Mr. Gary Streeter (Plymouth, Sutton) : Is my hon. Friend aware that there is growing anger and resentment in the west country about the propensity of the French to take the law into their own hands? First, British lorries were blockaded in Calais by the French. Then British lambs were burnt by the French. Now our fishing fleet is attacked by the French. Is my hon. Friend aware that, if he takes a tough line on this, he will enjoy the support of my constituents, the House and the nation?

Mr. Curry : I am, and I will.

Madam Speaker : We must now move on to business questions.

Column 389

Business of the House

3.43 pm

Dr. John Cunningham (Copeland) : Will the Leader of the House state the business for next week?

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton) : Yes, Madam. The business for next week will be as follows :

Monday 29 June--Remaining stages of the British Coal and British Rail (Transfer Proposals) Bill.

Tuesday 30 June--Remaining stages of the Boundary Commissions Bill.

Motions on the Child Support Regulations and the Council Tax Benefit (General) Regulations. Details will be given in the Official Report.

Motions on Select Committees related to Government Departments. Wednesday 1 July--Remaining stages of the Community Care (Residential Accommodation) Bill [Lords].

Thursday 2 July--Debate on the programme of activity and themes of the United Kingdom presidency of the European Community on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.

Friday 3 July--Private Members' motions.

Monday 6 July--Opposition day (3rd allotted day). Until about seven o'clock there will be a debate described as "The Recession in Industry" followed by a debate described as "The Government's Failure to Contain Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy". Both debates will arise on Opposition motions.

--[Tuesday 30 June

Child Support Regulations and

Council Tax Benefit Regulations

(1) Child Support (Maintenance Assessment Procedure) Regulations (2) Child Support (Maintenance Assessments and Special Cases) Regulations

(3) Child Support (Information, Evidence and Disclosure) Regulations

(4) Child Support (Arrears, Interest and Adjustment Maintenance Assessments) Regulations

(5) Council Tax Benefit (General) Regulations.]

Dr. Cunningham : As the House will be interested to learn of the British Government's support for the confirmation of Mr. Jacques Delors in his post, can we be assured that, on the Prime Minister's return from Lisbon, he will make an oral statement explaining exactly his reasons for endorsing Mr. Delors?

I welcome the statement about Select Committees. I congratulate the Leader of the House on taking the necessary steps to change the Standing Orders to allow Select Committees to be established to scrutinise Departments of State, as he has outlined. Will he confirm that, in contradiction to what happened throughout the last Parliament, when his predecessor was in conflict with the Standing Orders, it is the Government's intention, in this Parliament, to establish a Select Committee on Scottish Affairs?

Will the Leader of the House clarify the Government's position on the Maastricht Bill? Although I welcome the debate that is to be held next Thursday on developments

Column 390

in the European Community under the British presidency, will he reaffirm that the Government intend to publish a statement on the situation with respect to the Maastricht treaty and the Government's Bill relating to it, and that that statement to Parliament, which the Prime Minister pledged some time ago, will be the subject of a separate debate?

Mr. Newton : I shall not engage in further interpretation of the comment made about Mr. Delors by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister a quarter of an hour ago during Question Time ; nor will I pre-empt anything that my right hon. Friend might wish to say to the House on his return from Lisbon. I can respond to the hon. Gentleman's serious question--whether there will be a statement on my right hon. Friend's return--by saying that the answer is yes. I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's words about the Select Committees, and I am extremely pleased to be able to put the House into the position from which it can pave the way for further progress on this matter. It is the Government's firm intention that a Scottish Select Committee should be established. The Standing Orders already provide for such a Committee, as the hon. Gentleman said. What will be contained in the amendment to the Standing Orders that I shall be laying later today is a proposal to have a Scottish Select Committee of 11 members, rather than 13, which will bring it into line with virtually all the other Select Committees. That in itself is intended as easing the way forward to bringing about the appointment of a Scottish Select Committee.

As to the Maastricht Bill, I shall reply to the hon. Gentleman in a slightly different way from that which he invited me to. He will recall that both the Prime Minister and, subsequently, I said that, before the Government invited the House to make further progress on the Bill, we envisaged a further debate paving the way. That debate is not the debate that I am proposing for next week. The debate that I am proposing for next week is one that I can describe in shorthand terms, without going back over the phrasing that I used earlier, as marking the inauguration of the United Kingdom presidency of the EC, and enabling the House and the Government to discuss that.

Mr. Peter Brooke (City of London and Westminster, South) : Given the paraphernalia that is attached to the Dispatch Box in the interests of our wider public, will my right hon. Friend, during the coming week, ask his colleagues on the Treasury Bench not to shout because it makes a disagreeable noise for those behind, and perhaps subsequently to have a quiet word with those on the Opposition Front Bench along the same line ?

Mr. Newton : I am always happy to have a quiet word with those on the Opposition Front Bench, and I usually try to avoid shouting myself. I am sure that all in the Chamber and those who read Hansard will have noted my right hon. Friend's suggestion.

Mr. Max Madden (Bradford, West) : Can the Home Secretary be dragged to the House next week to make a statement explaining why he has issued secret instructions relaxing the primary-purpose rule ? Is the Leader of the House aware that Home Office officials have sought to adjourn scores of immigration appeals recently in which spouses, particularly those with British citizen children, are seeking to enter the United Kingdom, for those cases

Column 391

to be reviewed, the clear implication being that they will not be allowed to enter ? Those instructions have been concealed from the House of Commons. They should be made public, and the Home Secretary should explain why he has made those instructions so secret.

Mr. Newton : I do not think that you, Madam Speaker, the House or the hon. Gentleman would expect me to undertake to drag my right hon. and learned Friend to the House--apart from anything else, he is bigger than I am. But I shall certainly undertake to draw the hon. Gentleman's remarks to his attention.

Mr. Andrew Hargreaves (Birmingham, Hall Green) : Will my right hon. Friend undertake to include in our schedule a debate on AIDS? He probably reads the newspapers as much as any other hon. Member and will know about the alleged incident involving people in the neighbourhood of my constituency who may have been deliberately infected by a man knowing that he was HIV-positive. Will my right hon. Friend organise such a debate at some stage so that we can examine the legal implications of such an incident?

Mr. Newton : I well understand the concern that must be felt by my hon. Friend and other hon. Members, not only those from the relevant part of the midlands. I cannot undertake to provide time for a debate but, if my hon. Friend considered it appropriate, he may wish to seek an Adjournment debate.

Mr. John McAllion (Dundee, East) : Following the statement made this week by the Secretary of State for Scotland, which appeared to rule out any substantial reform of government in Scotland following the Prime Minister's stocktaking exercise, will the Leader of the House make Government time available next week for Scottish Members to raise on the Floor of the House the Government's abject failure to recognise the democratic demand for a directly elected and powerful Scottish Parliament in Scotland in line with the EC principle of subsidiarity?

Mr. Newton : I am clearly not in a position to predict or pre-empt the outcome of my right hon. Friend's stocktaking exercise. My response to the hon. Gentleman's particular point on this occasion would be that, as I witnessed, there was a lively and well-attended Scottish Question Time earlier this week in which the hon. Gentleman participated. Those matters have had a fair airing in the past few days.

Dr. Michael Clark (Rochford) : Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in anticipation of the debate next Tuesday on Select Committees, 88 hon. Members have signed an early-day motion recommending the retention of the Energy Select Committee? Has my right hon. Friend any plans for any Select Committee announced to the House this afternoon? Will next Tuesday's debate be of an adequate length to allow all views to be aired, will it be in the early hours of the morning or at a sensible time, and will there be a free vote?

Mr. Newton : The amendments that I am tabling today provide for the deletion of the Energy Select Committee. That is not unreasonable, because the basic principle on which departmental Select Committees have always operated, and the basis on which I have been pressed to provide Committees in respect of national heritage and

Column 392

science and technology, has always been that they should match Departments, and that is a sensible proposition on which to rest. With regard to the timing of the debate, perhaps I can rest on further discussions through the usual channels. I cannot give an exact undertaking about the timing of the debate, especially in view of my hon. Friend's hint that he might want it to be a long debate, in which case the timing might in part be in his hands. Similarly, voting is a matter which is best considered in other ways.

Mr. James Wallace (Orkney and Shetland) : The Leader of the House has just described the principle of shadowing Departments. I am sure that Northern Ireland Members hope that that principle will be extended to them.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us any idea when he expects the Scottish Select Committee to be set up, how many members it will have and whether all Scottish Opposition parties will be represented? He mentioned Scottish Question Time. Will he bear in mind the fact that Scottish Members will not have another opportunity to question Ministers until 21 October? Does he not consider that that is outrageous, and that efforts should be made to set up a Scottish Grand Committee next week--or at least before the House rises--so that questions can be asked?

Mr. Newton : I shall fall back on a traditional formula : I shall draw the hon. Gentleman's latter comment to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland. As for his earlier questions, as I said earlier, the amendment that I am tabling today will provide for a Scottish Select Committee with 11 members. The details of its membership are, of course, a matter for the Committee of Selection.

Sir Teddy Taylor (Southend, East) : Will the Leader of the House give us a clear assurance that, if the Government do not use their powers to block the reappointment of the President of the European Commission, the proposals for increased expenditure and increased resources for the EC that Mr. Delors has submitted will be available in the Vote Office in time for Thursday's debate?

Mr. Newton : I cannot give my hon. Friend such a specific undertaking off the cuff. In any event, it is likely that there will be further discussion of the future financing of the EC--which is, I imagine, what my hon. Friend has in mind--in Lisbon over the weekend, and that will entail examining the position after Lisbon.

Mr. Alfred Morris (Manchester, Wythenshawe) : Has the right hon. Gentleman seen my early-day motion 236, which calls for the ring-fencing of community-care functions, and has been strongly supported by hon. Members on both sides of the House?

[That this House expresses its grave concern that funds for community care will not be specifically allocated in the Revenue Support Grant after April 1993, when local authorities will have clear and specific responsibility for the provision of community care ; believes that funds must be targeted if the quantity of services is to increase to meet needs and the quality to meet demands ; supports the recommendation of Sir Roy Griffiths for a specific grant to be given to local authorities, as the basis for local funding ; notes that a specific grant provides a mechanism for Parliament to scrutinise fairly the performance of local authorities, allows local authorities to plan and develop

Column 393

services with a guaranteed base of funding, and makes it impossible for local authorities to allow funds for community care to be diverted for any other purpose ; notes that Ministers already utilise specific grants for mental illness, and for drug and alcohol abuse ; and most strongly urges the Government to announce that the funds for community care after April 1993 will be clearly earmarked.] If, as The Times reports, we have won and the Government have changed their policy, why cannot the House be told that? When will a statement be made?

Mr. Newton : I am not in a position to confirm press reports that the right hon. Gentleman has seen, not all of which I consider to have been completely accurate. He will, however, be aware that, as it happens, the issue of community care will arise in one way or another during the debate on the Community Care (Residential Accommodation) Bill that is scheduled for next Wednesday.

Mr. James Hill (Southampton, Test) : Has my right hon. Friend had time to read early-day motion 204?

[That this House notes that on 1st January 1993 there will not be a requirement to customs clear goods in free circulation within the European Community, that the collection of VAT will move from payment at the point of entry to an audit method, similar to that used for domestic transactions and that this change may result in a large number of freight forwarders losing their jobs over night, with estimates currently predicting 3,500 redundancies in the United Kingdom ; notes that the Institute of Freight Forwarders and the British International Freight Association do not object to these changes ; however, bearing in mind that the loss of jobs is a direct result of a political decision, as opposed to market forces, considers it necessary for further funds to be made available by the Government for retraining and to encourage employees to remain at their posts until the end of the year ; and further considers as the Dutch and French Governments have provided funds to assist the forwarding industries in their respective countries, that this is a precedent and the United Kingdom could join in to make the transition period between now and 1st January 1993 as smooth a change over as possible.]

The motion describes the difficulties that will be faced by the Institute of Freight Forwarders when we enter the single market on 1 January. The institute forecasts 3,500 redundancies in the area involved. Although its members--many of whom are constituents of mine--are not taking an aggressive line, they nevertheless say that the decision has been political rather than commercial. They look to the Government for some form of help, for instance with job training.

Mr. Newton : I shall draw my hon. Friend's remarks to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment. As he will know, however, the Government have already established a wide range of measures to help people who are unfortunate enough to lose their jobs in freight forwarding or any other industry.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover) : May we have a statement next week about the fiddling of proxy votes down in Cornwall? May we have an assurance that, when that statement is made, we shall be able to consider all the other parts of Britain where--in such places as nursing

Column 394

homes, especially private nursing homes--the Tory party is using agents to fiddle votes left, right and centre? Let us have no more rabbiting on about a citizen's charter while the Tory party, from the very top, is taking people's votes away.

Mr. Newton : As the hon. Gentleman is no doubt aware, the allegations to which he has referred are being investigated by the police, who have sent a preliminary report to the Crown prosecution service. I think he will understand that, in the circumstances, I neither can nor should comment further.

Mr. Patrick Cormack (Staffordshire, South) : Having rightly earned the gratitude of the House for his announcement about Select Committees, will my right hon. Friend earn it further by saying when we will debate the Jopling report?

Mr. Newton : I can give a pretty clear indication in one sense : the business that I have announced today runs up to 6 July, 10 days before the proposed date of the recess, subject to the progress of business. I have given commitments that we shall debate the Jopling report in that period. That narrows it down. I cannot narrow it down further today.

Mr. William Ross (Londonderry, East) : Has the right hon. Gentleman read reports in the Northern Ireland press on the imprisonment of an individual for fraud at the De Lorean motor company? Will he arrange for the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to make a statement to the House next week on that serious fraud and to tell the people of Northern Ireland whether the Government intend to seek the extradition of John De Lorean from the United States to stand trial, since he is alleged to have benefited very much from the fraud?

Mr. Newton : That is a pretty direct request that I am asked to transmit to my right hon. and learned Friend, and I shall ensure that it is transmitted.

Sir Michael Neubert (Romford) : Should we not have an early debate on the need for adequate accommodation to enable Members of Parliament and their staff to deal with, in my experience, the increasing case load of constituency correspondence? Is progress on the new parliamentary building in jeopardy as a result of the setback in the financing of the Jubilee line extension? If so, is not that of direct concern to the House?

Mr. Newton : Obviously, matters of accommodation are of concern to the House and I am aware of the pressures that are felt by many Members of Parliament and their secretaries. I am glad, therefore, that this week we have been able to set up the new Accommodation and Administration Sub- Committee. I have no doubt that my hon. Friend's comments can, should and will be drawn to its attention.

Mr. Harry Barnes (Derbyshire, North-East) : Parliamentary scrutiny of the Executive is rapidly disappearing. In the three-month recess, we shall not be able to question the Executive in the House. Privatisation has helped to get rid of the Department of Energy and the Energy Select Committee. Agency agreements mean that hon. Members can no longer ask about a host of matters. We have had to wait ages for Select Committees to be established. Will there be a Select Committee on Northern

Column 395

Ireland, because under direct rule Northern Ireland Members can investigate matters affecting them only on the Floor of the House?

Mr. Newton : I hope that the hon. Gentleman will forgive me if I do not get drawn down the wide paths of the introductory part of his question, but I should like to respond to the latter part of it. The position on a Select Committee on Northern Ireland is fairly well known to the House. In a Government response to the Procedure Committee's report on Select Committees, we said that we see a need for further consideration of the desirability and practicability of such a territorial Committee. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland believes that this is one of a series of complex issues that are best left open for consideration in the broad context of the current political talks. It certainly is not ruled out, but it is felt that it should be pursued in that context.

Sir Jim Spicer (Dorset, West) : My right hon. Friend will be aware that the Adjournment debate on Monday night has the slightly romantic title of "Camping by Travellers". It is being initiated by my hon. Friend the Member for Worcestershire, South (Mr. Spicer). Will he assure me that it will not be just an ordinary Adjournment debate but that much attention will be focused on it, because we are talking not only about Worcestershire but about Dorset, Devon, Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire and almost every rural county that is now being plagued by these people ? The police are being diverted from their proper tasks, and farmers are being put to enormous trouble and expense. Could he please deal with that ?

Mr. Newton : My hon. Friend will understand that I can hardly promise to rush through an amendment to Standing Orders to provide for an extension of the usual half-hour Adjournment debate, but I can undertake--I am sure that many Members on both sides of the House would wish me to do so --to underline to the Minister who will reply to the debate the concern that is felt by many Members.

Mr. Doug Hoyle (Warrington, North) : When will we get the Government's response to the report of the Top Salaries Review Body ? Will it be next week ? Will the right hon. Gentleman inform the Prime Minister that their response should take the form of a statement to the House and not a reply to a written question ?

Mr. Newton : I shall draw the hon. Gentleman's comments to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, but beyond that I cannot make a prediction because my right hon. Friend has not yet received the report.

Mr. Robert Adley (Christchurch) : Madam Speaker, you will have heard my right hon. Friend announce the business for Monday, which is the remaining stages of the British Coal and British Rail (Transfer Proposals) Bill. You may also recall that I have asked my right hon. Friend on several occasions whether a White Paper will be issued before the House finishes debating the Bill, but we have still not received one. Are you aware that we debated the issue in Committee and that the vote was tied, but that you and your colleagues will shortly be called on to choose the amendments for Monday's debate? May I ask you to bear

Column 396

that in mind, and may I ask my right hon. Friend whether the White Paper will appear in time for the House to debate it before we rise for the summer recess?

Mr. Newton : I plainly cannot say that the White Paper will arrive before the House is invited to debate the Bill further on Monday, nor am I in a position to give a precise undertaking about the timing of the White Paper, but, clearly, I shall ensure that the Secretary of State for Transport is aware of the way in which my hon. Friend has pressed me again on the issue. However, I had the feeling that a good part of my hon. Friend's question was directed at you, Madam Speaker, rather than at me.

Mr. Eddie McGrady (South Down) : Is the Leader of the House aware of what must be described as directives issued by the Northern Ireland Department of Health and Social Services to the boards, which will have a devastating effect on health provision in Northern Ireland? In view of the fact that the Minister involved is not a Member of the House, that the consultation period will end before the House reconvenes and that the Minister refuses to meet Members of Parliament to discuss the matter, will he please find time to enable the Northern Irish Members of Parliament to discuss the very dramatic change in health provision in Northern Ireland?

Mr. Newton : As the hon. Gentleman will know, there have been substantial opportunities to debate Northern Ireland affairs generally in the past week or two. Nevertheless, I shall draw the request to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

Mr. Mark Wolfson (Sevenoaks) : Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is important to have an early debate on the present size, and diminution in the last decade, of the British merchant fleet, and the defence implications?

Next Section

Home Page