| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Ward : My hon. Friend will understand the importance of tourism to the borough of Poole. Does he also understand the vital necessity of withdrawing the regulations that are impeding progress and, frankly, are unnecessary? I congratulate my hon. Friend and his colleagues on the additional support that they are giving to the tourist industry.
Mr. Sproat : I thank my hon. Friend for the kind remark at the end of his question. I am indeed aware of the importance of tourism to Poole, and he may be interested to know that last week I met a delegation from the British Resorts Association, which is forging a new and helpful relationship with the Department. Of course, we are acutely aware that tourism is one of the largest industries in this country and that it has perhaps not always been given the attention that it should have been, but it will be given it in future.
London Orchestras
16. Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make additional funds available to maintain the current number of London orchestras.
Mr. Brooke : I recently announced the level of grant in aid to the Arts Council for 1994-95, which includes an increase of £800,000 in the previously planned figure for next year. Within that global total, it is for the Arts Council to determine its artistic policies and priorities and the allocation of funds to individual arts organisations. Decisions on the funding for the London orchestras are, therefore, a matter for the Arts Council.
Mr. Banks : The Secretary of State is a very urbane Pontius Pilate ; none the less he is a Pontius Pilate. The selection of London orchestras has been an appallaing scandal and no other city would have handled it in such a way. It is incumbent on the Government to give the London arts scene the support that it requires to sustain five orchestras.
Mr. Brooke : The House and the audience constituency must decide whether they want the arm's-length principle to be observed. The Arts Council's decisions, which have been subject to commentary, were absolutely within its right and purview. In that respect, it was a matter for the Arts Council to decide. As I said in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Sir T. Arnold), the matter has not yet been concluded, as the Arts Council still has to make a decision.
Sir Michael Neubert : Although I understand and support the arm's- length principle governing my right hon. Friend's relationship with the Arts Council, could he make it a condition of his overall grant to the council that it does not engage in the humiliating process to which London orchestras have been subjected in recent weeks? Orchestras that have illumined London's concert-going for decades have had to go through a Eurovision song contest to get funds for next year.
Mr. Brooke : I will reiterate, as I did in answer to the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks), that
Column 677
it was a proper procedure for the Arts Council to follow in terms of its responsibilities and disposition of funds. My hon. Friend may be right if he surmises that the Arts Council has learnt some lessons from its experience.PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMISSION
National Audit Office
29. Mrs. Gorman : To ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission if he will make a statement on the level of funding of the National Audit Office.
Sir Peter Hordern (Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission) : The National Audit Office's estimate for 1994-95 of £36.5 million was considered and approved by the Public Accounts Commission on 7 December. That is £0.8 million less than what was proposed in the corporate plan approved in July.
Mrs. Gorman : I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. The National Audit Office is one area of Government activity that should be increasing its expenditure to keep a check on the waste which I have identified, just by reading a range of newspapers, as amounting to some £9 billion. Is he aware, for example, that it is estimated that the £15 million increase in the telephone bills in Whitehall have resulted from calls to the 0898 number, which is what people telephone when they are desperate for information on the cricket scores?
Is my right hon. Friend also aware that this year the Government have spent £154 million on leaflets, one of which was entitled "How to be a better dog owner"? It advises people to feed their pet regularly, give it its own sleeping basket, keep it warm and take it for walkies. Will the National Audit Office look into that kind of thing?
Sir Peter Hordern : The National Audit Office is already busily engaged with its programme, but I will draw my hon. Friend's comments to the attention of the Comptroller and Auditor General.
Dr. Howells : Will the Chairman acknowledge the fact that the National Audit Office plays a crucial role in ensuring that there is no slippage in Government administration towards what one can only call an Italian mode of government?
Sir Peter Hordern : I do not know what instances the hon. Gentleman has in mind--
Dr. Howells : The Welsh Development Agency.
Sir Peter Hordern : That matter has been dealt with by the Public Accounts Committee, which I am sure will want to consider it again. The National Audit Office and the Comptroller and Auditor General will have a continuing interest in the matter.
30. Mr. Simon Hughes : To ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission what funds will be made available for the National Audit Office to investigate the work of Government agencies.
31. Ms Lynne : To ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission what finance will be made available for the National Audit Office to investigate the work of Government agencies.
Column 678
Sir Peter Hordern : The National Audit Office budget of £36.5 billion for 1994-95 includes provisions both for financial audit of Government Departments, executive agencies and a wide range of other public sector bodies and for value-for-money investigations. The forward investigation programme of the National Audit Office is a matter for the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Public Accounts Committee.
Mr. Hughes : I am grateful for the Chairman's answer. Given the current debate on the subject, will he ask the National Audit Office urgently to look at the cost benefits of the Child Support Agency? Will he ask it quickly to evaluate whether all the money spent on the agency and its work is worth it, in terms of what is beeing recouped and from whom? He will be aware that the Government are reviewing the issue. It would be helpful if the National Audit Office produced a report to inform the Government's decision.
Sir Peter Hordern : The National Audit Office does undertake the financial audit of the Child Support Agency. That includes an examination of the accuracy of maintenance assessments. The hon. Gentleman may wish to know that, as part of the normal strategic planning and marketing process, developments at the agency are being monitored with a view to a possible value-for-money investigation.
Ms Lynne : Will the National Audit Office examine the work of the Prescription Pricing Authority in the light of allegations that dispensing general practitioners have been overpaid value added tax?
Sir Peter Hordern : The Prescription Pricing Authority is a very small body, whose accounts are audited by the district audit service on behalf of the Audit Commission. The audited accounts form part of a summarised account that is reviewed by the National Audit Office before final certification by the Comptroller and Auditor General. No value-for- money work is planned, but if the hon. Lady would care to write either to me or direct to the Comptroller and Auditor General, the matter will be considered.
HOUSE OF COMMONS
Refreshment Department
33. Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Chairman of the Finance and Services Committee what is the accumulated surplus of the House of Commons Refreshment Department ; what plans there are for its use ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Paul Channon (Chairman of the Finance and Services Committee) : The accumulated surplus of the House of Commons Refreshment Department trading fund was £2.7 million at 1 April 1993. As mentioned in the 15th annual report of the House of Commons Commission, it is intended to use that surplus to help to cover the cost of the Refreshment Department's modernisation programme.
Mr. Greenway : Could some of that modernisation extend to more home- made puddings in the Members' Cafeteria, instead of apple pie made by machine? Exactly
Column 679
what are the refurbishment plans envisaged for that £2.7 million? There have been so many press rumours that it would help the House to know what is proposed.Mr. Channon : My hon. Friend should address the first half of his question to the Director of Catering Services or to the Chairman of the Catering Committee, and I shall ensure that he knows about it. On the second part of my hon. Friend's question, we have not yet seen the report of the Catering Committee. When we do, we shall have to take a view of it-- indeed, the whole House may have to take a view on it--but at the moment we cannot do so as the report has not yet been published.
Parliament (Access)
34. Mr. Miller : To ask the right hon. Member for
Berwick-upon-Tweed, as representing the House of Commons Commission, what expenditure has been authorised to improve access to Parliament for people with sensory disabilities.
37. Mr. Gapes : To ask the right hon. Member for
Berwick-upon-Tweed, as representing the House of Commons Commission, what facilities are currently available for disabled visitors to the Palace of Westminster and to each of the parliamentary outbuildings ; and what financial provision has been made to improve them.
Mr. A. J. Beith (on behalf of the House of Commons Commission) : Details of the facilities available for disabled visitors to parliament are set out in a leaflet that is available from the Serjeant at Arms and which has been incorporated into the Members' handbook. A sum of £250,000 is included in the proposed programme of works for 1994-95 to improve those facilities. The Accommodation and Works Committee is conducting a comprehensive review of the issue, and funding in future years will be determined once the Committee's conclusions are known.
Mr. Miller : I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that reply. I direct his attention to the needs of those with hearing difficulties. Within the programme to which he referred, what action is intended to take account of the six action points in the paper, which I know he has received, from the Royal National Institute for the Deaf?
Mr. Beith : That paper has gone to the Accommodation and Works Committee, which I understand is consulting following a substantial report from the specialist architect, which it is also considering and which will form the basis of a report in due course.
Mr. Gapes : What steps are being taken to make it easier for those who have difficulty walking to pass through a number of the entrances and exits in this building--for example, the Norman Shaw building and the main St. Stephen's entrance? I know just from pushing my baby daughter in a pram how difficult it is to move around this building. Those with difficulty walking must have a terrible time. What steps are being taken to deal with that?
Mr. Beith : That is the sort of work which, among other things, we hope the £250,000 will cover. Because of the period when the building was built, some of the entrances are especially difficult to adapt. However, hon. Members
Column 680
will notice that in the newer buildings, in particular, adequate provision has been made from the start and many adaptations are taking place or are planned.Parliamentary Works Budget
36. Mrs. Gorman : To ask the Chairman of the Finance and Services Committee if he will make a statement on the future of the parliamentary works budget.
Mr. Channon : Since the transfer to the House in April 1992 of the vote for works services, a 10-year rolling programme of work has been developed in consultation with the Treasury. That will provide the basis for future works budgets and takes account of the requirements of the House, such as the provision of office accommodation for Members and the need to remedy the backlog of maintenance on the Palace and outbuildings.
Mrs. Gorman : Does my right hon. Friend agree that at a time when so many of our constituents are feeling the pinch and lack the spare cash to do up their homes, Parliament must be doubly careful to set an example of frugality when doing up its premises?
Although the decoration and refurbishment of 1 Parliament street are splendid, is my right hon. Friend aware that they cost about £36 million? The current refurbishment of 7 Millbank, although most desirable, represents a level of luxury of which some of us are almost ashamed. When I walk through the corridors of that building, I count the number of unnecessary light bulbs and encounter doors made of beautiful beech that are so heavy and large that a woman my size can barely shove them open--and I certainly will not be able to do so in a few years' time. Does not my right hon. Friend agree that we should think carefully when deciding the standards of accommodation for Members?
Mr. Channon : I am sure that my hon. Friend underestimates her physical and mental powers, but in general I agree with the important points that she makes. I expect that my hon. Friend realises that hundreds of people work at 7 Millbank, so it was inevitably an expensive project. She is right to say that such matters are now carefully scrutinised. Reasonable recommendations are often received from domestic committees, and work often has to be done on grounds of safety and, above all, of fire protection. My hon. Friend's point is well taken and I assure her that we will examine all budgets with great care.
Mr. Flynn : Could not part of the budget be used to solve a problem that was identified at a recent seminar for civil servants with severe disabilities? As it is impossible for such civil servants to enter the Chamber in a wheelchair, there is a bar on their promotion, because they cannot occupy the invisible Box in the corner.
Mr. Channon : The right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) dealt with the issue of disability a few moments ago. The hon. Gentleman makes an important point, and I will see that it is drawn to the attention of the appropriate authorities.
Column 681
NATIONAL HERITAGE
Television Franchises
17. Mr. Gunnell : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what arrangements are in place to ensure that companies taking over regional television franchises fulfil the undertakings in respect of meeting local and regional needs given by their predecessor.
Mr. Brooke : The Independent Television Commission is responsible for enforcing the requirements on every regional licence holder to provide regional programmes. Those licence conditions apply regardless of changes of ownership.
Mr. Gunnell : The Secretary of State will be well aware that many of the bids by companies that subsequently won franchises promised regional programmes and the creation of jobs within the regions in which those companies would operate. If Yorkshire Television's franchise, for example, were taken over by another company, that would obviously have a significant effect on the jobs in Yorkshire promised by that company when it originally sought its franchise. What will be done to ensure that regional employment is not lost as a result of the decision to allow the acquisition of franchises?
Mr. Brooke : The licence holder remains the licence holder even if another company controls the licence following a takeover. In the case cited by the hon. Gentleman in the Tyne Tees area, the licence holder would continue to be answerable to the ITC for discharging the licence that it was granted.
Mr. Lidington : Did not we hear the same scare stories from the Opposition when the present ITC regime was introduced by the Broadcasting Act 1990? Does my right hon. Friend agree that the commission has proved effective in making sure that companies observe their obligations and that there is no need to doubt that it will prove effective in future?
Mr. Brooke : I am grateful for my hon. Friend's comments. The ITC said that the transition to the new arrangements was undertaken more smoothly and with greater stability than previous transitions.
Mr. Mandelson : In the light of the move by London Weekend Television to fend off Granada's predatory bid by jumping into bed with Yorkshire Television, is not the Secretary of State the least bit concerned that Tyne Tees Television could be a casualty in these shenanigans? Will he assure television viewers in the north-east that Tyne Tees Television's commercial viability and regional programme output will be entirely secure, whatever change in ownership takes place?
Mr. Brooke : As to the regional discharge of licences, I gave the answer to the hon. Member for Morley and Leeds, South (Mr. Gunnell) earlier. As we discussed in the House last week, the fact that Yorkshire Television controls Tyne Tees, and the consequences that that has in terms of a takeover, are factors which would weigh in the mind of anybody considering such a takeover.
Column 682
Arts Funding
19. Mr. Sheldon : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage when he next expects to meet the chairman of the Arts Council to discuss funding.
Mr. Brooke : I regularly meet the chairman of the Arts Council to discuss a range of issues.
Mr. Sheldon : In reply to an earlier question, the right hon. Gentleman said that the task of the Arts Council was to provide a stable framework. Does not he agree that the thing that is clear about the Arts Council is its unpredictability? Are not the regional theatres, and Manchester in particular, suffering from that unpredictability, as are the orchestras in London?
Mr. Brooke : The Arts Council has the overall responsibility for the allocation of funds to various art forms and, when the decision is taken about which art forms, to particular institutions. It cannot be the case that those proportions are always set in concrete. The Arts Council made a decision at its recent meeting at Woodstock to allocate a larger proportion of funds in certain areas and a smaller one in other areas.
HOUSE OF COMMONS
Prime Minister's Question Time
39. Ms Jowell : To ask the Lord President of the Council what representations he has received about the order and method of Prime Minister's Question Time.
The Lord President of the Council and the Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton) : The only representation I have received has been from the Procedure Committee in its report into parliamentary questions-- House of Commons No. 687, Session 1992-93. Its recommendation was :
"On balance, we do not recommend any changes designed to alter the present balance between open and closed questions to the Prime Minister."
The Government accepted that view.
Ms Jowell : Given that "Erskine May" states that the purpose of a parliamentary question is to seek information or to press for action, what steps does the Lord President propose to take to prevent time-wasting at Prime Minister's Question Time by hon. Members who are seeking neither to obtain information nor to press for action but simply to show loyalty to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Newton : My right hon. Friend the Chairman of the Procedure Committee was not able to be here, but I will draw his attention to the hon. Lady's remarks. If she gives me the undertaking that no Opposition Member will seek to make political points during Prime Minister's Question Time, I might consider her request.
Oral Questions
40. Mr. Clifton-Brown : To ask the Lord President of the Council what plans he has to amend the system for the tabling of oral questions.
Mr. Newton : I have no plans to alter the system for the tabling of oral questions.
Column 683
Mr. Clifton-Brown : May I draw the attention of my right hon. Friend to the difficulties that some hon. Members have in tabling oral questions for a Monday due to their constituency engagements? Will he suggest to the Chairman of the Procedure Committee that those hon. Members be permitted to table oral questions for a Monday on the preceding Thursday? Failing that, will my right hon. Friend suggest to him that oral questions be taken until 6 o'clock on Monday?
Mr. Newton : There has been some consideration of that matter, and I refer my hon. Friend to the further report of the Procedure Committee, following the Government's response. Of course, I will draw the remarks of my hon. Friend to the attention of my right hon. Friend.
Mrs. Beckett : Is the Lord President aware that there is still concern on both sides of the House about the implications of the workings of agencies, particularly the Benefits Agency, for the tabling of questions and whether replies are offered? All too often, hon. Members who seek to table questions to the relevant Secretaries of State find that answers cannot be obtained. Will the right hon. Gentleman examine the matter?
Mr. Newton : The right hon. Lady will know that some changes have been made in the way in which those matters are dealt with--for example, to ensure that replies from chief executives appear in an appropriate way for hon. Members to be aware of them. There are no further plans to change the arrangements at the moment. However, I would not reject out of hand what the right hon. Lady has said.
Sitting Days
41. Mr. Winnick : To ask the Lord President of the Council on how many days the House will have met during 1993.
Column 684
Mr. Newton : On the basis of the House's agreement to rise for the Christmas recess on 17 December, there will have been 165 sitting days in 1993. Allowing for weekends and bank holidays, the number of non-sitting days will have been 88. Those figures compare with the averages for the calendar years since 1979, which are 166 sitting days and 88 non-sitting days respectively. If election years are excluded, those figures become 172 and 82 respectively.
Mr. Winnick : Does the Leader of the House recognise that there will be no consensus about changing the hours and sitting days so long as the Government treat the House with the contempt that they are showing this week? Does he realise that the manner in which the House is being treated with contempt will mean that there will be parliamentary warfare well into 1994 and that the responsibility for that lies entirely with the Government and the contemptible manner in which they are treating the business of the House on Tuesday and Wednesday?
Mr. Newton : I do not, of course, accept the hon. Gentleman's comment about contempt, but no doubt we shall have opportunities to debate that tomorrow. However, quite apart from the averages that I have mentioned, there were two non-election years--1986 and 1991--within the past eight or nine years in which the figures were almost exactly the same. In 1991, the figures were exactly the same as those that I have just given for 1993. In view of the reference to the Jopling report, the following is a direct quote from that report :
"Compared with the legislative bodies in other large democracies the House of Commons continues to sit for more days and for many more hours in a year than any other."
As far as the great majority of the House is concerned, I make no apology for continuing to try to act within the spirit of the Jopling recommendations.
| Next Section (Debates)
| Home Page |