| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Barry Jones (Alyn and Deeside) : I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his references to the River Dee crossing. Bearing in mind the fact that there is almost total traffic chaos in industrial Deeside, when will the project be completed--indeed, when will engineering work begin-- and what will be the cost? Does the statement mean that Llay Park primary school and Penylag large school will be rebuilt and that Hope high school will be extended?
Mr. Hunt : That was quite a package of questions.
Madam Speaker : Just answer two.
Mr. Hunt : Very well. I shall announce detailed funding of the third Dee crossing next year, but in the meantime I have allocated £2 million to Clwyd county council for further preparatory work. As I know the area well, I agree with the hon. Gentleman's remarks about congestion. The schools are a matter for the local authorities concerned.
Dr. John Marek (Wrexham) : Since the Minister said that a high level of investment is continuing in Wales, will he explain to the House why there are more potholes in the roads than there were under Labour, why InterCity services to north Wales are at their lowest level ever--a lot lower than under Labour--and, most important, why no council houses are being built? If no council houses are being built, that must be the lowest possible figure. Why are the Government doing so badly, yet the right hon. Gentleman pretends at the Dispatch Box that the figures are fantastic? Does he realise that the people were not born yesterday and that they proved that by not voting for him or his party in Wales at the last general election?
Mr. Hunt : I notice that the hon. Gentleman has not queried any of the gross figures that I announced. They stand up to close consideration because they are true. That is the level of gross spending next year and it is a record. In gross terms, there has never been such a large capital programme in Wales before. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman ought to pay tribute to that. I do not mind if he attacks his local authority through me, but the potholes are a matter for the authority. Under this Government, there has been record spending on roads in Wales, and we are continuing those record levels.
Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West) : Why is there nothing in the statement to tackle the most serious threat to jobs in Wales--the threat caused by the changes in the defence industry? Jobs have already been lost at Trecwn, Brawdy and Caerwent, at Marconi in Newport and at Glascoed. If the Government are not prepared to set up a
Column 48
diversification agency, why does the Secretary of State not allow Welsh local authorities to take serious practical steps to find alternatives to present defence jobs in Wales?Mr. Hunt : If the Opposition spent less time attacking the Welsh Development Agency, which I am very proud of--I have paid tribute to it on many occasions and it is the envy of many people in the United Kingdom-- they would realise that it is a good diversification agency and that it is constantly looking out for opportunities for new investment. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the many announcements on new projects that I have been privileged to make in conjunction with local authorities and the WDA. I am delighted that Wales is winning record inward investment. I shall endeavour to ensure that we continue to do so. Am I wrong to look for a little more support from the Opposition?
Mr. Elfyn Lwyd (Meirionnydd Nant Conwy) : While I welcome the initiatives that the Secretary of State referred to in Caernarfon, Ely, Barry and so forth, may I remind him of the terrible state of the A470 in Meirionnydd Nant Conwy? He was there in August. What priority, if any, will be given to that much-needed scheme? Secondly, it is the view of both borough councils in my constituencies that the capping proposals come at the wrong time, bearing in mind the fact that for some years there has been a great deal of belt tightening. The Secretary of State is careful to say that he wants to prevent unreasonable levels of council tax. I regret that one must reach the inevitable conclusion that a bad level of services will be offered to the community, at a time when extra spending is necessary as care in the community is on the horizon. Will he rethink the whole matter? I heard him say that he is open to representation, but when local authorities make representations they feel that they are not listened to by the Welsh Office.
Mr. Hunt : Again, I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman asked a large number of questions, but I shall try to deal with a few of them. I announced local authority expenditure on roads today. I have not announced the Welsh Office programme ; that announcement will come later. May I therefore place in context the hon. Gentleman's remarks? On finance, my announcement represents expenditure per head in Wales for 1993-94 of £901 for every man, woman and child in Wales. According to the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Davies), at 90 per cent. I am funding too high a level of support as, for spending of £901, I am providing aggregate external finance of £812 for every man, woman and child in Wales. From whatever direction the figures are viewed, they represent a reasonable deal for the people of Wales.
Mr. Roy Hughes (Newport, East) : Does the Secretary of State appreciate that our local authorities play a major part in attracting new industries to their areas, and that that has been the case in Newport and Gwent in particular? Does he not feel that those efforts need to be stepped up, especially in view of the major Marconi closure in Newport? Yet, under his proposals, our local authority is faced with no growth. How can the borough council be expected to regenerate the town with such a limitation?
Mr. Hunt : The hon. Gentleman's first point echoes the remarks of his hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Davies). I announced gross funding for the industry
Column 49
programme. I recognise the significant role played by local authorities, in particular in winning the QPL investment, which was the good result of a positive partnership with Newport borough council. I recognise that and constantly pay tribute to it, although hon. Gentlemen sometimes pretend that I do not. I take every opportunity to pay tribute to the efforts of Gwent county council and Newport borough council in winning investment, and, of course, I want that to continue.Mr. Ted Rowlands (Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) : The hon. Gentleman referred to schemes of regional significance. May I draw his attention to two schemes of considerable significance to the heads of the valleys? The first is the beginning of a dual carriageway over the heads of the valleys, and the second is the beginning of the missing link in the A465. Both schemes have considerable regional signfiicance and would secure vitally important jobs at both Vaynor and Penderyn quarries. Can he make an announcement as quickly as possible on the start of both schemes?
Mr. Hunt : As I made clear to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd), I am not announcing Welsh Office schemes today. That announcement will come. Today I announced transport grant-supported schemes. I shall bear in mind the matters that the hon. Gentleman has mentioned, but I ask him to understand that there has been record spending by the Welsh Office on roads, and it is not always possible to give priority to schemes favoured by individual Members.
Mr. Martyn Jones (Clwyd, South-West) : The Secretary of State will be aware that European funding was set in April at 1.43 ecu to the pound and is now 1.24 ecu to the pound, which means that the Government received a windfall of some 17 per cent., amounting to £260,000 in social fund spending in Clwyd alone. Will the Secretary of State assure the House that he will allow Clwyd to spend some of that money, or will it be used merely to reduce the public sector borrowing requirement for the United Kingdom as a whole?
Mr. Hunt : On the hon. Gentleman's direct question, I have made provision of £70.6 million, which is my forecast of the receipts likely to be forthcoming this financial year from the European regional development fund. However, it is now up to local authorities to put forward schemes--some have already done so--and see whether they are successful in their bids for ERDF grants. I have made it clear that they can expect to receive matching supplementary credit approvals in addition to those that I have announced in the local authority capital settlement.
Mr. Alan W. Williams (Carmarthen) : Will the Secretary of State confirm that his figure for total standard spending next year is a 3.1 per cent. increase on the TSS last year, but that local authorities spent 2.5 per cent. above their TSS figure this year? That 3 per cent. increase is, therefore, nowhere near enough for local authorities simply to maintain existing services. Does it not mean that they will have to make cuts or find their money from poll tax payers?
Mr. Hunt : Yes, I confirm the figures quoted by the hon. Gentleman, but that increase has been made against a
Column 50
difficult economic background. An increase in TSS of 3.1 per cent. is reasonable, bearing in mind that the figure has gone up by 25 per cent. in the past two years.Mr. Peter Hain (Neath) : Why does not the Secretary of State admit that, through his underfunding and cutting, he is instructing West Glamorgan county council, Clwyd borough council and Neath borough council to cut services, school provision and jobs? I am disappointed that he has made no announcement about the future of Cwmtawe school, which is a crucial project dependent on Welsh Office capital funding. I am also disappointed that he has not announced when he will proceed with the A465 missing link construction.
Mr. Hunt : On the A465 construction, I thought that I had made it sufficiently clear earlier that we are dealing today with local authority transport grant-supported schemes, not Welsh Office road schemes.
Mr. Nick Ainger (Pembroke) : Is the Secretary of State aware that, irrespective of his feeling that he has a positive partnership with local government in Wales, the county councils are extremely angry with the formula that he has devised for transferring further education colleges to the independent sector? Will he confirm that that formula is based on assumed rather than actual expenditure and that, in the case of Dyfed county council, it will cost the general education budget £2 million? Will he also explain why, although he has a task force in place in west Wales, he has announced no specific capital allocation for Preseli Pembrokeshire district council?
Mr. Hunt : Again, the hon. Gentleman has asked a number of questions. On his first point about the further education allocation, I had to make a decision with the best advice available to me on the appropriate transfer of funds to meet the needs of further education colleges. I am not sure whether he has consulted the further education colleges--he may have consulted only local authorities--but I do not believe that the further education colleges regard that amount as sufficient. I must now consider adding to that figure to allocate proper resources for further education next year.
Mr. Dafydd Wigley (Caernarfon) : In welcoming the Secretary of State's statement about the new strategy, which includes Caernarfon and four other locations, I notice that the total sum earmarked is £2.5 million. Does he recall that, when he visited Caernarfon a few weeks ago there was talk of a package of £8 million for regenerating Caernarfon? Will he assure me that there has been no slippage from that and that the other moneys will arise from other programmes or be made available in the subsequent financial year?
Mr. Hunt : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the detail of my announcement which is only part of the package for regenerating Caernarfon. Other partners are making contributions. However, I shall look into the point that he raises.
Mr. Llew Smith (Blaenau Gwent) : Will the Secretary of State confirm that, when he visited my constituency just a week or so ago, he witnessed the fact that our bus service, bus depot and shopping complex had gone into receivership and that there was bad housing, record unemployment, low wages and under-investment in education? Although we welcome investment in the
Column 51
Tredegar bypass road and congratulate the local authorities and action committee on their support, does he accept that all the other measures that he mentioned are utterly irrelevant to the unemployed, those in bad housing and those suffering many other forms of deprivation?Mr. Hunt : The hon. Gentleman was with me in Tredegar when we were presented with a regeneration strategy, which has only just arrived at the Welsh Office. I regard today's announcement as demonstrating that the Tredegar bypass is high on the list of Welsh Office priorities, as it was on Gwent county council's list of priorities. I hope that the £300,000 for the regeneration of Tredegar will be regarded by everyone in Tredegar as a down payment showing our good will, because those are the properly costed schemes that have been put to us so far. We shall now respond to the strategy that has just been received and shall consider it in consultation with the local authorities concerned.
Mr. Allan Rogers (Rhondda) : The Secretary of State's statement will be viewed with great dismay in the valley communities, because no substantial money is being made available for council and ordinary house repair and improvement grants. At the beginning of the 1980s, the Government poured a lot of money into those grants and it made a substantial difference to our communities. Unless they embark on a repair and improvement grant system to that extent, houses in the valleys will decay yet again.
Mr. Hunt : The sums that I have announced for home renovation grants are extremely sizeable. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the statement that I made earlier about the allocation being made to the valleys. Although the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Davies) tried to portray the urban programme as a cut, failing to take account of the special consideration of the national garden festival at Ebbw Vale and some other considerations, I ask the House to consider the package as a whole and recognise that it represents record gross spending in Wales. It is about time that the Labour party paid tribute to that. Although I recognise that the hon. Gentleman has done so, he will acknowledge that several Opposition Members have not been as generous in their praise. I hope that he has set an example. I remind the House that we are dealing with record capital growth spending in Wales and I am delighted to have been able to announce that today.
Mr. Win Griffiths (Bridgend) : Despite everything that the Secretary of State says about the amount of Government support for local authorities in Wales,
Column 52
because of the dispute over further education and the money already committed for the police and the fire service, little extra money will flow from local government coffers in Wales to support the services they provide. Will the Secretary of State make a special effort this year to look into the money being spent by local authorities to provide conversions or new central heating for old age pensioners and to provide money for disabled people who need their houses adapted? In many parts of Wales, the time that pensioners and disabled people must wait for those conversions to be undertaken is scandalous. I hope that he will look into the matter and provide extra money if the need for it can be shown.Mr. Hunt : The hon. Gentleman will be aware of the substantial additional funds that I have put into the programme during the three-year period that I announced last year. It is a matter for local authorities, but I will check on the issue that he raised. However, he should see the matter against the background of the greatly increased level of funding.
Mr. Paul Murphy (Torfaen) : Does the Secretary of State recall that only two hours ago he was praising local authorities in Wales and talking of co-operation ? How is it that he is now introducing for the first time in Wales the most detailed and draconian capping criteria, which must severely restrict council spending ? Does he not realise that the quality of life of hundreds of thousands of Welsh men and women will be profoundly affected by the revenue settlement and capping criteria ? Is it not ironic that, while the Secretary of State's appointed quangos can apparently spend as they wish, our democratically elected councils have to cut, cut and cut ? Is that not a case of double standards ?
Mr. Hunt : No, it is not. The hon. Gentleman has failed to recognise that we are talking against a background of an increase in total standard spending over the previous two years of 25 per cent. and, in addition, I am allocating 3.1 per cent. I thought that I had made it clear earlier that I regard the settlement as being difficult for local authorities, just as the overall settlement is difficult for central Government. However, I believe that it strikes the right balance. I repeat that the £2,599.8 million is a substantial settlement, which represents £901 of spending next year by local authorities for every man, woman and child, towards which central Government will be funding, through aggregate external finance, £812. I believe, when the hon. Gentleman examines the figures, he will see that they are reasonable, bearing in mind the present economic background.
Column 53
Points of Order
5.22 pm
Mr. Bryan Davies (Oldham, Central and Royton) : On a point of order, Madam Speaker. This is a genuine point of order--
Madam Speaker : I only hear genuine points of order.
Mr. Davies : This is a particularly genuine point of order--as you would expect, Madam Speaker. I understand that Ministers make statements on the basis of permission granted from the Chair. I wonder whether you would be prepared to consider expressing to Ministers your reluctance to grant such permission for non-emergency statements that are made on Fridays, such as the significant statement on arts funding which was made to a limited House last Friday? It caught many of us entirely unawares, despite the fact that the statement's gestation period was almost as long as that of an elephant ; it was certainly not an emergency statement. For those of us who had important constituency commitments--I was travelling north to meet--
Madam Speaker : Order. I think that I can deal with the point of order.
I assure the hon. Gentleman and the House that the phrase "with permission" used by Ministers is simply a matter of courtesy. The Minister involved certainly does not need the permission of the Speaker of the House and can make statements to the House at the appropriate time 3.30 pm or 11 am on Fridays. It has nothing to do with the Speaker or the Office of Speaker. I hope that that makes it clear to hon. Members in the Chamber and those who may not be present.
Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North) : On a point of order, Madam Speaker. When a large number of right hon. and hon. Members are rising to speak and you come to the conclusion that it is not possible to continue with the exchanges due to other pressing parliamentary business, do you keep some sort of list of those who are not called so that they may have an opportunity to catch your eye during the following exchanges? I seem to be particularly unlucky.
Madam Speaker : I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman has always been unlucky, but I know full well that he was unlucky today. I assure hon. Members that I keep a full list of those who are not called, not only on what might be called important statements, but on all statements.
Mr. Dafydd Wigley (Caernarfon) : On a different point of order, Madam Speaker. It was widely reported in the press in Wales this weekend that the long-awaited Welsh Language Bill, which the Government have been studying for the past six years and promised in the Queen's Speech, is to have its First Reading--after which it is printed--on Thursday.
It is extremely inconvenient for the House, and raises questions about the Government's motives, for the Bill to be introduced on the last day of the parliamentary Session so that it will be available in the Vote Office in printed form only after hon. Members have returned to their constituencies. That cuts across the opportunities to
Column 54
discuss the contents of such legislation, and, given the inordinately long period that the Government took to get the Bill that far, appears to be an abuse of the House.Madam Speaker : The hon. Gentleman will be aware that that is not a matter for the Chair, as it involves no breach of Standing Orders or procedures. Those on the Treasury Bench will have heard what the hon. Gentleman said.
Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones (Ynys Mon) : On a different point of order, Madam Speaker. You have often deprecated the practice whereby Ministers make important statements behind the curtain of written questions. That happened on Thursday, when an important statement was made stating that £20 million had been cut from the budget of hill livestock compensatory allowance payments for farmers, with great consequences for farmers in all parts of the United Kingdom. That is the sort of statement that should be made on the Floor of the House so that the Minister can be challenged from all sides on the nature of that drastic cut. Have you had a request for a statement today?
Madam Speaker : The answer to the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question is no. Let me make it absolutely clear that I have never deprecated the fact that the Government issue statements in the form of answers to written questions. That has always been the procedure in the House, whatever the complexion of the Government. I deprecate the practice of a Government making a statement outside the House to organisations outside the House before doing so in the Chamber.
Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones : Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker : Order. There can be nothing further to that point of order. I answered the hon. Gentleman's last question and clearly dealt with the procedures on written questions and statements made outside the House.
BILL PRESENTED
Commonwealth of Britain
Mr. Tony Benn presented a Bill to establish a democratic, federal and secular Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Wales dedicated to the welfare of all its citizens ; to establish fundamental human rights within that Commonwealth ; to lower the voting age to 16 years and to make other provision with respect to elections, including equal representation for women ; to prescribe a constitutional oath ; to establish a Commonwealth Parliament consisting of the House of Commons and the House of the People and to make provision for the term of a Parliament and for legislative and other procedure ; to establish the office of President, and a Council of State, and to prescribe the powers of each ; to provide for the formation of governments ; to amend the law relating to official information, the armed forces and the security services ; to make fresh provision for the participation of Britain in the United Nations Organisation and the European Communities ; to make the basing of foreign forces in Britain dependent upon the approval of the House of Commons ; to make new provision with respect to the judicial system and to establish a National Legal Service ; to set up national Parliaments for England, Scotland and Wales ; to amend the law relating to local government, the district auditor
Column 55
and the accountability of police forces ; to end the constitutional status of the Crown and to make certain consequential provision ; to abolish the House of Lords and the Privy Council, to end the recognition in law of personal titles, and to provide for the acknowledgement of service to the community ; to disestablish the Church of England, abolish the offence of blasphemy, and to provide for equality under the law for all religions and beliefs ; to end British jurisdiction in Northern Ireland ; to provide for a Constitution and for constitutional amendment ; and to make transitional and related provision : And the same was read the First time, and ordered to be read a Second time upon Friday 29 January ; and to be printed. [Bill 103.]STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS, &c.
Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(3) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.).
Savings Banks
That the National Savings Bank (Amendment) Regulations 1992 (S.I., 1992, No. 2892) be referred to a Standing Committee on Statutory Instruments, &c. -- [Mr. Wood.]
Question agreed to.
Column 56
Adjournment (Christmas)
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That this House, at its rising on Thursday, 17th December, do adjourn until Monday 11th January.-- [Mr. Wood.]
5.27 pm
Mr. Patrick Cormack (Staffordshire, South) : Thank you, Madam Speaker, for calling me at the beginning of the debate.
In 22 years in the House, I have never before felt genuinely angry about the House adjourning, but today I do. It is appalling that the House should adjourn this week without devoting a full day to debating the terrible situation in the Balkans. As my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House well knows, I have asked him on successive Thursdays to change the business of the House so that we can have a debate on the Adjournment to discuss the position in Bosnia. He has politely but firmly refused, and on two or three occasions he has urged me to use the opportunity presented by the Christmas Adjournment and I am grateful to Madam Speaker for calling me now. I have a high regard for my right hon. Friend and am glad to count him as a genuine right hon. Friend, but I do not think that it is good enough.
The most appalling atrocities since those of the second world war are being committed in the heart of our continent. The crisis--it is no less than that--in the Balkans, presents the world with its greatest post-war crisis. Unless firm action is taken in the next three or four weeks, we could be moving towards a European Armageddon--and so far, such action has not been taken. We could find ourselves with a full-scale Balkan war involving not only Bosnia but Kosovo and Macedonia, and erupting to such a degree that Bulgaria and Albania would be drawn in--not to mention Greece and Turkey, both NATO members, with all the ghastly implications of that.
In a moment, I should like to spell out some of the possible consequences of such a holocaust. Last week I had the privilege of taking part in the launch of a new venture, Action for Bosnia, embracing all political parties. I was delighted to see the right hon. Michael Foot there. All political parties and all shades of religious opinion were brought together by a common horror at the atrocities and a common concern for what might follow. Later that day, I had the privilege of receiving in my room here two Bosnian Members of Parliament, one a Serb and the other a Muslim. Although of different political persuasions, they were united in their grief and in their pleas that something be done.
Later that day, one of these Bosnian Members of Parliament, Professor Filipovic, sent me a fax from Geneva, where he is taking part in the talks. He was a professor of philosophy at the university of Sarajevo. I have never met a more cultivated, gentle, widely read or deeply compassionate man. If he sat in this House, we would all be proud to call him a colleague.
Professor Filpovic sent me a fax with details of the casualties up to 23 November--some three weeks ago. Between the beginning of May and 23 November--the figures have not been disputed--128,000 people were killed in Bosnia : 59,000 of them by arms and explosions, 10,000 by cutting tools and sharp weapons, 2,500 by
Column 57
drowning and 30,000 by unidentified objects. It is a grisly and ghastly catalogue--a catalogue which is an indictment of those of us who have stood by while it has grown.On Friday, I abandoned my constituency engagements and went up to Edinburgh to take part in a conference deliberately organised to coincide with the summit. The first day of the conference was given over to the delivery of papers by academics from Europe and the United States--papers in which the rich cultural history and heritage of Bosnia were movingly and graphically described.
On Saturday, we concentrated on the politics. I contacted the Foreign Office to ask that a Foreign Office Minister meet the Bosnian Foreign Minister who had come over specially for the conference. I pay tribute and am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Member for Watford (Mr. Garel- Jones), who left Holyrood house and the summit, came to our conference and spent almost an hour with the Bosnian Foreign Minister and me discussing the problems. I am also grateful to the Foreign Secretary for making the meeting possible. As a privileged participant in the discussions between two Foreign Ministers, I cannot possibly repeat what was said between them. What I can say is what Mr. Silajdzic told me and told the conference later that afternoon. I am delighted to see the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn and Lochaber (Sir R. Johnston) in his place, because he too was a participant in the conference, as was the hon. Member for Western Isles (Mr. Macdonald).
The Bosnian Foreign Minister said a number of things which I believe we all need to take carefully into account. First, he made it plain that this is not a civil war--a point that many of us have made in the past. This is a war in an ancient country with ancient borders ; a country that has in the past been a shining example of what a multi-ethnic, multicultural country should be. Christians of the Orthodox and Roman Catholic persuasions and Muslims have lived happily side by side, intermarrying and weaving a rich tapestry of civilisation in that part of Europe.
As Mr. Silajdzik said, this is not really a war at all. A war implies a conflict or contest between two parties who go to war for particular reasons. This is not war : it is a slaughter of an innocent population, in the numbers to which I have referred, with all sorts of attendant atrocities. The phrase "ethnic cleansing" ought to make the flesh of every hon. Member creep. The things that are being done to enforce ethnic cleansing are barbaric beyond belief.
As Mr. Silajdzic told me, there can be no worse crime than the killing of a child--but there can be : the killing of a child following its torture. There can be no worse crime against a woman than rape--but there can be, he said : it is when those women are put into rape camps. In one motel--there may be more--in Bosnia, young girls and women are taken and ravished by soldiers and others and then killed. One man has publicly admitted to killing 200 of them in this manner.
This is what is going on as we debate our Christmas Adjournment. Winter is gripping Bosnia ; it is a real winter there, not the sort of white Christmas for which we might fondly hope, but a winter when the temperatures can sink to 32 below, and beyond. In Sarajevo last week, there were five days without electricity or water. I have arranged for Mr. Silajdzik to come and address hon. Members in a Committee Room two days after we return. I hope that Members will come and listen to him--if he is still alive, because he is going home during the Christmas recess.
Column 58
Mr. Silajdzik is also a highly civilised, cultured man. Although Bosnia is a small country, it has people of great quality. I was enormously impressed by the quality of its Foreign Minister- -a professor of history, a man who had devoted his life to scholarly pursuits before serving what he thought would be a newly independent nation. He spoke graphically and chilllingly of what was happening to his country.What struck me most was that his concern was not just for Bosnia. He said that he had been accused the previous day by a Foreign Office official-- not, I hasten to add, my right hon. Friend the Member for Watford, who could not have been more concerned--of being emotional. Who would not be emotional, given the circumstances ? Despite the emotion, the Foreign Minister was concerned about the wider issue and the wider view.
He told me, as he told the conference later, that, if the Balkans erupt into full-scale war, he was fearful of two consequences above all. The first--I totally agree--is that the spectre of Muslim fundamentalism or extremism would rear its head. Mujaheddin are already fighting in Bosnia-- not because they were invited, but because they went there. The leaders of the Arab world met in Riyadh 10 days ago. They told the international community that something must be done by 15 January, or else--that, from the responsible leaders of the Arab world.
Behind them are those whose representatives howled me down in Trafalgar square in August when they called for a jihad--a holy war. Just imagine what would happen--this is not impossible--if Muslim extremists took power in the key nations of the Arab world and in Turkey. Could there be a greater destabilising of our world ? That prospect should make us all pause.
The second consequence that concerned Mr. Silajdzic and which concerns me is that the validity of the world order--the United Nations itself--is on trial. If we fail to deal with what is happening, what example is that to those who would foment trouble in other newly emerging countries ? You know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as I do, that, in parts of the former Soviet Union, peace is fragile and brittle, and in other parts it has already been broken--Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia. What is happening in Kazakhstan--a nuclear power ?
If we do not exert some real world leadership through the United Nations, what sort of signals will we send ? This is a terrible crisis, and I infinitely regret that we have not done more already. I urged for many months--in fact, for a year--that we should do more. I repeat my belief that, had we taken firmer action when Dubrovnik and Bukovar were bombed and shelled, the Bosnian atrocities might never have happened.
We have not only failed to exert any force but said that we would not do so. We ruled out the doctrine of the deterrent. That was a serious mistake. We must do something now. If we do not, we could all be parties to a great crime. Edmund Burke, one of the greatest orators ever to command the House, said :
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
I do not suggest for a moment that the good men who sit on both Front Benches--and they do--have done nothing. I do not suggest that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and the Government have done nothing. But what they have tried to do was not enough, and was not successful.
Column 59
The sanctions have not worked. The shuttle diplomacy has not worked. The killing has continued, is continuing, and will continue. There is no point in dismissing the situation and saying, "It's too difficult." There will be risks whatever we do, and there are certainly risks in doing nothing. I do not pretend that surgical air strikes are necessarily easy--although precision bombing seemed to work in Iraq. I do not pretend that, if we put more troops on the ground, the terrain will be easy--although I have never advocated massive ground involvement.I feel rather ashamed of my country when the faint-hearted view seems to prevail that, because a certain number of German divisions were required to keep the population down during the past world war, we should be reluctant now. That has been proved to be something of a myth. There were not a great number of divisions, and those that were there, were for the most part, "Dad's Army" divisions--reserves. I believe that this crisis is of the gravest magnitude and that the House should have been given a full day to debate it. The Government should have gone forth, reinforced by a mandate from the House--as they did at the time of the Falklands war, which was another rather tricky operation--and tabled resolutions at the United Nations. I am glad that the communique issued at Edinburgh on Saturday was much tougher and less ambiguous and equivocal than previous communique s. We now need action and the United Nations should be activated quickly. The air exclusion zone must be enforced, and the killing of innocent civilians stopped. I want proper peace and prosperity throughout the whole of the former Yugoslavia. I am not anti-Serb as such, although I am very much anti the aggressive dictator who rules in Belgrade currently, and what many of his henchmen have done. I am glad that Saturday's communique was unequivocal in its condemnation of them.
If the House is to adjourn without debating Bosnia, let the message go to the Government that we expect no rest during the recess that will take Ministers away from seeking to play a part in solving that great problem. If the House returns and nothing is done by 15 January, if the Arab world decides to take this one on itself and outside the umbrella of the United Nations, we will have begun to go down a very slippery slope.
It is an urgent matter. I know that I have gone on about it at some length, and that I have raised it many times in the House. I hope that my colleagues will forgive me, but I feel deeply about the matter--so deeply that I must tell my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House that the Government cannot be sure of my vote on anything if something is not done about Bosnia.
5.47 pm
Mr. Alfred Morris (Manchester, Wythenshawe) : We have heard a moving and persuasive speech by the hon. Member for Stafffordshire, South (Mr. Cormack) on a grave crisis of universal concern. For my part, I want briefly to raise three urgent and highly important issues about which, demonstrably, there ought to be at least oral ministerial statements before the House rises for the Christmas recess.
The first is that of the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council's report on chronic bronchitis and emphysema in
Column 60
coal miners and metal production workers. The IIAC report recommends, on page 7, that both conditions should be prescribed as industrial injuries in relation to current and past miners who have worked underground. The need for a definitive statement of the Government's position is made all the more urgent by the high death rate among miners whose work has led to serious respiratory illnesses which, as the Lord President knows, often leave their victims struggling to breathe.The right hon. Gentleman is also aware of a leaked internal memorandum to the President of the Board of Trade, in which it was pointed out that, because of the high death rate among miners with chronic bronchitis and emphysema, the longer the Government delay the less they pay. That appalling cynicism deeply shocked public opinion. Given that the report went to the Government as long ago as 17 August, surely it is high time now for a clear statement of their response. The second issue that I want to raise is the smallness and lack of clarity of the monetary figures and words on the new Bank of England notes, the E series, and the similarity of the print colours used for the £10 and £20 notes. It is widely reported that that lack of clarity has caused distress to cashiers and shoppers alike, more especially to large numbers of people with impaired eyesight. Lord Henley, a Treasury spokesman in another place, was told there on 5 November that, if he ever stood at the head of a long queue in a supermarket and said that he must spend time trying closely to examine bank notes, he would be "howled down".
That was put to Lord Henley by my good friend Lady Llewellyn-Davies, in response to his statement that the new bank notes had been deliberately printed with figures that were hard to read to encourage people to examine them closely and thus combat forgery. Lady Oppenheim-Barnes, who formerly chaired the National Consumer Council, was not amused. She told Lord Henley :
"Most people do not have the time to give a minute examination to every note when passing them during the day" ;
while Lord Jenkins of Hillhead, a former Chancellor, said that it was
"totally out of proportion that the possibility of forgery should take precedence over whether notes are easily identifiable."--[ Official Report, House of Lords, 5 November 1992]
It is now clearly important that the Bank of England should be asked urgently to pay due attention to the widespread and increasing criticism of the new series--not least among people with visual impairments--and that a Treasury Minister should respond to public concern in a statement to the House. The other place has been able to debate the issue, and it must be right for this House at least to be able to question a Minister.
My third issue concerns the future of the independent living fund, whose help for very severely disabled people can mean all the difference between their living independently in their own homes and being shut away in long- stay institutions, almost certainly at far higher cost to the taxpayer than that of an adequate ILF grant. The Alzheimer's Disease Society, in which I take pride in holding honorary office, says :
"The sudden announcement that the Fund would stop receiving applications after 25 November was a major shock".
The gap between closure of the fund and the launching successor body will, says the society,
| Next Section
| Home Page |