| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Arbuthnot: As a Lloyd's name, I suppose I should declare an interest. As the hon. Gentleman is coming up to pension age, perhaps he, too, should declare his interest.
I always enjoy the hon. Gentleman's contributions. On this occasion, as he mentioned wages and prices, he had the opportunity to set out whether it was Labour party policy to uprate pensions by prices or by wages.
Mr. Arbuthnot: How reassuring for us.
The Labour party has, however, produced no policy on that. It is not so much a pig in a poke as a porker in a pickle.
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMISSION
Value-for-money Audits
28. Mr. Cohen: To ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission what funds will be provided to the National Audit Office for value-for- money audits. [27642]
Sir Peter Hordern (representing the Public Accounts Commission): The net budget of the National Audit Office for 1995-96 is £37.6 million. That includes provision for both financial audit and value-for-money investigations. The Commission will meet on 4 July to consider the future expenditure of the NAO.
Mr. Cohen: Is not the Government's incompetence becoming legendary-- witness the fiasco at the weekend when tens of thousands of officially held documents were found? Is not such incompetence expensive for the taxpayer? The shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury has produced a document entitled "Waste Watch", which shows that more than £21 billion has been wasted by the Government since 1989 on wrong priorities and ideological experiments. Is there not a case for more value-for-money audits--conducted sooner rather than later--so that Government incompetence can be exposed and prevented. That would put an end to such plain bad management.
Sir Peter Hordern: The hon. Gentleman did not give me notice of his exact question, but I have read the document to which he referred. It is a rag-bag of some quite good points and some absolute rubbish, as one would expect from the Labour party. I had the good fortune to a member of the Public Accounts Commission during the previous Labour Government, under whom the omissions and faults were just as bad as they are under this Government.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: The right hon. Gentleman is supposed to be neutral.
Sir Peter Hordern: The hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell- Savours) would bear witness to that record.
Mr. Hawkins: Are there any plans to introduce value for money audits, supervised by the National Audit Office, of inefficient, wasteful Labour councils, such as Hackney, Islington and those in Lancashire?
Sir Peter Hordern: No. Such work would be for the Audit Office, not the National Audit Office.
Column 14
Statisticians
29. Mr. John Marshall: To ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission what is the current number of statisticians employed by the National Audit Office. [27643]
Sir Peter Hordern: The National Audit Office employs about 550 staff who either have accountancy qualifications or are training for them. Of those staff, 25 have degrees in statistics or mathematics. There are eight full-time professional statisticians or operational researchers. In addition, when specialist statistical advice is needed, the NAO uses external experts.
Mr. Marshall: I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. He is no doubt well aware of the difficulties that the NAO has experienced when dealing with the World Health Organisation. Would he like to comment on them and to offer any advice to the Government?
Sir Peter Hordern: The House may be aware that the Comptroller and Auditor General thought it right not to carry on with his work as auditor of the World Health Organisation because it involved a most unsatisfactory process. The Comptroller and Auditor General has issued a statement, which I expect Members will have seen. The House and all subscribing countries owe a vote of thanks to the Comptroller and Auditor General for his hard work and assiduousness on behalf of all subscribing nations to the WHO.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: Is the best way to deal with the problem simply to pull out? I have every respect for the Comptroller and Auditor General, but would it not be wiser to stay in, argue the issue publicly and secure reforms? At the moment, we have no guarantee that changes will be made to the process. May I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that in his reply to me he freezes the political content that he used in answer to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen), as he holds a non-political office?
Sir Peter Hordern: I apologise most sincerely to the hon. Gentleman for offending his political sensibilities in any way. I understood that there was a hint of political content in the hon. Member for Leyton's question, and I hope that the hon. Member for Leyton did not mind the way in which I answered.
In answer to the hon. Gentleman's question, I would say that--so far as I know--this country is still a subscribing member of the World Health Organisation.
HOUSE OF COMMONS
Hourly Wages
32. Mr. Wicks: To ask the right hon. Member for
Berwick-upon-Tweed, representing the House of Commons Commission, how many House of Commons employees employed directly or on contract, receive hourly wages of (a) £4 or less, (b) £3.50 or less and (c) £3 or less; and what is the lowest hourly rate for anyone working in the House of Commons. [27631]
Mr. A. J. Beith (representing the House of Commons Commission): None of the staff employed by the House of Commons Commission is paid an hourly rate of less than £4. The minimum point on the salary scale of the
Column 15
most junior grade equates to £4.39 per hour. Two staff in this grade are currently paid at that rate. The House authorities do not hold details of the wages of staff employed by contractors.Mr. Wicks: Is it not a disgrace that the House does not know the level of pay of staff employed by contractors? Is not that pay likely to be very low? Should not we satisfy ourselves from data that the people we employ are paid a fair wage, so that we are not an exploitative employer and the House of Commons is not a House of poverty?
Mr. Beith: As I pointed out, the people whom we employ are paid a fair wage. The House uses contractors principally in the Parliamentary Works Directorate and the Refreshment Department, and usually has contracts with firms or agencies rather than with individuals. If the hon. Gentleman has evidence of low pay in those areas, he should draw it to my attention so that I may draw it to the attention of the Department concerned. The rates paid by the House to contractors take account of the prevailing rates of pay for the appropriate levels of skill for which the contract is made.
Mr. Peter Bottomley: Does the right hon. Gentleman know whether the House of Commons Commission employs anyone below the ages of 18 or 19? He may discover that, as in some other public organisations, the rates of pay are high while the number of young people employed is nil.
Mr. Beith: I would require notice of that question, but I shall obtain the information and let the hon. Gentleman have it.
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMISSION
Expenditure
30. Mr. Janner: To ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission whether he will make a statement on the current year's expenditure of the National Audit Office. [27644]
Sir Peter Hordern: The Public Accounts Commission approved the National Audit Office estimate of £37.6 million net for 1995-1996 on 6 December 1994.
Mr. Janner: Will the Chairman tell the House how much of that expenditure goes towards producing the figures on unemployment, which nobody in the country believes to be anything other than fiddled? Will he consider whether the National Audit Office might not produce another set of figures to show how many people in this country want a job but cannot get one, because that is the real measure of joblessness in this land?
Sir Peter Hordern: On the unemployment statistics, the hon. Gentleman may be referring to a report by the Royal Statistical Society, which is not a matter for either the National Audit Office or the Comptroller and Auditor General. The comptroller's job is to look into waste in Departments and value for money. The hon. Gentleman may care to put his question to the Secretary of State for Employment.
Column 16
SOCIAL SECURITY
Pensioner Incomes
17. Mr. Mark Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what has been the real average increase in pensioner household income since 1979; and what was the increase for the average household of the United Kingdom overall. [27617]
Mr. Arbuthnot: Between 1979 and 1992-93, average household income rose by at least 43 per cent. for pensioners. During the same period, average household income in the United Kingdom rose by about 38 per cent.
Mr. Robinson: I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Does that not show that all pensioners are now better off in real terms than they were in 1979, thus giving the lie to some of the Labour party's claims?
Mr. Arbuthnot: Yes, it does. It shows also the virtues of our pursuing funded occupational pension provision and other policies that have been dramatically successful in improving this country's economy.
Mortgage Interest
18. Mr. Pike: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what recent representations he has received regarding changes in benefit to meet mortgage interest payments. [27618]
Mr. Pike: Does the Minister recognise that, despite what was said in response to questions earlier this afternoon, the only free thing about the Skipton building society is the free publicity that it is receiving from the Government in the form of answers to questions? Is it not true that the Government can no longer claim that they are the friend of the house owner when that house owner runs into difficulty?
Mr. Evans: The answer to the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question is no. Far from receiving free publicity, the Skipton building society has behaved in a thoroughly responsible fashion. As a socialist, the hon. Gentleman might have bothered to notice that the margins of building societies and lenders are at an historic high of nearly 2 per cent. and that they are in a position to help their borrowers in times of adversity. The report by Special Risks Services showed clearly that many lenders will now introduce free insurance in such circumstances and that prudent lenders will do so universally.
Mr. Dewar: As the Minister has praised the Skipton building society for its responsible approach to the problem, will he comment on its clear view that the Government have got it wrong and on its opposition to their plans?
Mr. Evans: That is not so, as one can see if one reads all the statements of the Skipton building society. Ultimately, it will introduce the scheme and that is the important thing.
Mortgage Interest
24. Mr. Campbell-Savours: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what modifications he will
Column 17
introduce to his proposals for paying mortgage interest in the light of the Loughborough university and Policy Studies Institute research into the housing market, commissioned by the Department of the Environment. [27624]Mr. Roger Evans: The research commissioned by the Department of the Environment was not directed specifically to the Government's income support mortgage interest proposals. The report confirmed that the majority of those who are affected by arrears and repossessions do not currently qualify for income support. Our proposals will encourage the development of comprehensive quality insurance, as I mentioned a moment ago, so that all new home owners should obtain proper protection if they suffer a loss of income.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: Is it true that the report showed that two thirds of mortgage protection policies issued were invalid for reasons of exclusion? If so, is it not a remarkable statistic?
Mr. Evans: It is a remarkable statistic, but the sample was 12. The Special Risks Services report showed that 75 per cent. of those involved in lending were surveyed not only about their intentions in respect of mortgage insurance, but also about the issue that the hon. Gentleman has raised. The Housing Finance Gazette of April 1995 stated:
"One of the most unexpected results of the survey was the satisfaction with the claims service. The evidence, mostly anecdotal, from newspaper articles complaining about the claims service on creditor is largely unsupported by these figures."
The lender, as much as the borrower, has a vested interest in ensuring that quality insurance is in place to ensure that the borrower's obligations to the lender are met when the borrower falls into unemployment.
Mr. McLoughlin: Will my hon. Friend confirm that the Conservative party is the party of home ownership, that it encourages and will continue to encourage home ownership, that it has enabled millions of people throughout the country to buy their own council homes and that we shall continue to encourage people who wish to buy their own homes?
Mr. Evans: My hon. Friend puts four questions robustly. The answer to each is yes, and that historically is in stark contrast to the policies of the Labour party.
Benefits
26. Mr. Mackinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security by what machinery or method he obtains the views of recipients of social security benefits; and if he will make a statement. [27626]
Mr. Hague: The Benefits Agency commissions an annual national customer survey, carried out by an independent external research contractor, to examine customer opinion of the service that it provides. The overall satisfaction rating for the 1994 survey was 83 per cent.
In addition, all BA districts carry out local customer surveys, which focus on the difficulties encountered by customers. BA also holds a series of biannual meetings to provide organisations with an opportunity to discuss issues of concern to customers. The surveys are in accordance with citizens charter principles and the BA customer charter.
Column 18
Mr. Mackinlay: Is the Minister aware that pensioners will not consider an independent research company a proper way of sounding out individual views and frustrations, bearing in mind that married couples are losing some £20 a week due to the Government's meddling with the system of uprating pensions? Is it not time that the Government listened to pensioners, who feel frustrated by the level of their pensions and their lack of mobility on public transport? On the 50th anniversary of voting for a Labour Government and a welfare state, they see the great prize for which they fought and for which they voted in 1945 being eroded by the Government.Mr. Hague: Pensioners are included in the survey to which I referred, but in recent years they have benefited from the uprating of the pension in line with prices, the increased resources being given to the less well-off and oldest pensioners and the low inflation that the Government have delivered, in stark contrast to their predecessor.
HOUSE OF COMMONS
Business Questions
33. Mr. Flynn: To ask the Lord President of the Council what percentage of requests for debate at business questions resulted in parliamentary debates. [27632]
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton): Representations at business questions aramong a wide range of factors that influences the content and timing of the business of the House. In recent months, several debates have responded to such representations.
Mr. Flynn: Unfortunately, the Leader of the House has not answered the question. Does he agree that most right hon. and hon. Members regard business questions as a valuable opportunity to raise matters that are not otherwise on the Order Paper, with no real expectation of securing a debate? Does he agree that the system of business questions is now a meaningless ritual and that we should replace it with the system used in many Parliaments around the world, such as India and the United States, where, with the agreement of the Speaker, Members can speak for one minute during a period of about 10 minutes every day and raise any subject? Does he agree that the system of business questions and points of order is now archaic, meaningless, time-wasting and inefficient?
Mr. Newton: It is clear that, were any such opportunity to be created, the hon. Gentleman would almost immediately talk it out. Many of his suggestions are clearly for the Procedure Committee. It seems sensible that there should be a weekly business statement. How people choose to use it is a matter for them, under the rules laid down by you, Madam Speaker, but much ingenuity is undoubtedly used.
Mr. Dykes: Contrary to the previous churlish and over-lengthy question, will my right hon. Friend accept the thanks of the House for being a fair-minded Leader of the House and providing opportunities for debates on many subjects? In the same constructive spirit, will he give a little more thought to having slightly more debates
Column 19
on Europe on the Floor of the House, not just in Committee, so that we can debate the obvious merits of the single currency more often?Mr. Newton: On the latter part of my hon. Friend's question, on one recent occasion many members of the Select Committee on European Legislation found it useful to be able to question a Minister in a way that would not be possible on the Floor of the House. I agree entirely with the first part of my hon. Friend's question.
Privy Council Office
34. Mr. Mackinlay: To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will make a statement on the work of the Privy Council Office. [27633]
Mr. Newton: The Privy Council Office acts as the secretariat to the Privy Council. Among other things, it considers applications for the granting or amendment of royal charters, scrutinises changes in the byelaws or statutes of chartered institutions and in the governing instruments of universities and colleges, and arranges a variety of Crown and Privy Council appointments. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is serviced by the Department, which also contains the central drugs co- ordinations unit.
Mr. Mackinlay: Will the Lord President reflect on the fact that, had the Halifax summit occurred any time after the third week of July and before the third week of October, there would have been no statement in this House of Commons? If the BMARC affair had cropped up in that time, there would have been no debate here. Is it not time that this Parliament provided, at least in the first or second week of September, a period when we could have statements from Ministers and could probe the Executive? How is it that I can table parliamentary
Column 20
questions in January, February and March but cannot get replies in July, August, September or October? It is time this Parliament had proper sittings in the autumn to allow for proper scrutiny.Mr. Newton: The hon. Gentleman's question is all very interesting, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the one that I was asked.
Divisions
35. Mr. Skinner: To ask the Lord President of the Council how many Divisions have taken place in the House since January; and what was the figure for a comparable period in 1994. [27634]
Mr. Newton: The number of Divisions in the House for the period from Tuesday 10 January 1995 to Friday 9 June 1995 inclusive was 129. That period represented 90 sitting days. During the first 90 sitting days of 1994, covering the period from Tuesday 11 January 1994 to Thursday 26 May 1994 inclusive, there were 202 Divisions.
Mr. Skinner: Does the Leader of the House agree that there has been a dramatic change since the Jopling proposals were introduced in the House? I could not for the life of me understand why Tory Back Benchers, almost certainly facing a Labour Government in the near future, would want to throw away the opportunity to oppose that Labour Government. Then I suddenly realised why: because most of them realise that there will be a Canadian whitewash, and they will not have jobs.
Mr. Newton: An above-average amount of ingenuity is being shown this afternoon--quite apart from the first question. The principal reason for the figures that I have just given is likely not to have been the Jopling changes but the fact that the usual channels were not operating in the first half of last year.
Column 19
| Next Section (Debates)
| Home Page |