| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mrs. Taylor: If there were an incoming Labour Government, which there will be, we shall have a Scottish Parliament--and I am glad to have the chance to repeat that statement from the Dispatch Box. Instead, we have before us some half-baked suggestions by Ministers who have been trying to cobble together at the last minute a smokescreen to suggest that they are actually doing something. But the Government are not fooling anyone.
Mr. Phil Gallie (Ayr): The hon. Lady referred to comments supposedly made by the Prime Minister before
the general election, but, at that time, was she herself not saying that there would be a Labour Government after that election?
Mrs. Taylor: The hon. Gentleman speaks as a member of a party that stands at something like 13 per cent. in the opinion polls in Scotland, and that did about as well as that in the most recent local elections there. I do not think that we should take too many lectures about what is likely to happen from people with that amount of support in Scotland. Moreover, I quoted not what the Prime Minister allegedly said but from his interview in The Independent. If the hon. Gentleman has not seen the article, I shall be happy to send him a copy later.
Against that background--the panic action and the sudden acceptance of a problem, the about-turn by the Prime Minister--a statement was made to the House on 29 November. It was strong on hype but weak on substance. We were told beforehand that the statement would be very significant, and would be what the Scottish people wanted, but when it came to the point it all fell flat. The fact that this evening the Leader of the House has been able to summarise in so few words the changes being introduced shows that there is not much substance in them.
As the Leader of the House explained, any House of Commons Minister will be allowed to go to the Scottish Grand Committee--the "awayday feature", as my hon. Friend the Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) called it. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will be able to clarify two matters arising from that fact.
First, I understand that the Government Scottish Whip has not invariably been a Scottish Member. In that case, would such a Whip be allowed on the Floor of the Committee? Secondly, and more important, the right hon. Gentleman says that Ministers "may" attend the Scottish Grand Committee, but who will decide whether they do attend? Will the Committee have the power to summon a Minister and insist that he appear before it, or can the Minister decide to delegate the appearance to a junior? For example, if a deregulation issue is on the agenda, will the Deputy Prime Minister attend, or will he say that someone else will attend in his stead?
There are more outstanding questions. The Leader of the House has mentioned only non-controversial Bills; he has not covered controversial legislation. The Government are not creating something dramatically different but simply extending the talking-shop facility of the Scottish Grand Committee. They are not by any means opening the way for Scottish people to have more control over the decisions now made by Scottish Office Ministers.
I am sure that the Leader of the House is not really comfortable with the proposals that he has had to make, any more than he is happy with the way in which those decisions were reached. I should have thought that he might be worried about the precedent of introducing procedural change into the House without consultation. It certainly goes against the grain of all that he has told us on other issues.
If the Government were serious about tackling the problems with which the procedural motions are supposed to deal, Ministers should have been considering the remarkable achievement of the Scottish Constitutional
Convention, which achieved a consensus on a way forward, and which involved different political parties, elected members from Westminster and from local authorities, and people from outside politics. Surely that is the way forward, and Ministers should have thought about it before trying to bounce ideas on to the House.
Sir Hector Monro (Dumfries):
I suppose that we expected a pretty churlish response from the Opposition spokesmen to this important evolution of the procedures of the House, involving the Scottish Grand Committee. The hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) could not even bring herself to welcome something that is already getting a mounting press in Scotland. Representatives of the press and the other media are now coming to the meetings, and are beginning to understand that what the Secretary of State has proposed is really a major step forward in bringing Government to the people of Scotland.
The media are also beginning to understand that the panic is in the ranks of the Opposition--the panic that we have got it right. The Lady mentioned the Scottish Constitutional Convention, but that is made up of only two parties, and it seemed to spend most of the weeks in which it met squabbling. It has never answered the questions that really matter. That is why the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) is becoming more tetchy and rattled week by week, as his plans for an Assembly are being rumbled.
The hon. Gentleman will not receive any confidence from the Scottish people until he is prepared to stand at the Dispatch Box, or anywhere else, and answer the West Lothian question: how many Members of Parliament would the Labour party have in Scotland, and how would they arrange voting on measures for which not the Scottish Assembly but the Westminster Parliament is responsible? In recent weeks the hon. Gentleman has made no effort to answer the question that has been asked not only by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State but by many other members of the Conservative party in Scotland. He must wake up--
Mr. George Robertson (Hamilton):
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Sir Hector Monro:
The hon. Gentleman must answer the question.
Mr. Robertson:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Sir Hector Monro:
I shall give way only if the hon. Gentleman promises to answer the question. Will he do so? I see that he will not, so I shall not give way. That is too bad. He may have the chance to speak later, when he winds up for the Opposition.
Really good ideas are coming forward, with the Scottish Grand Committee meeting in Scotland and carrying out many useful tasks, so that the people can see us and can meet Ministers, including English Ministers, who come to address the Committee.
I shall ask my right hon. Friend the Minister one or two practical questions that he may be prepared to think about. He is right to say that the House authorities have moved heaven and earth to ease any difficulties, whether we meet in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, Inverness or anywhere else--which I am glad to do. I know that the usual channels have used their best endeavours to ensure that there is light voting on days when the Committee meets far from the central belt. If we meet in Inverness--as we shall, and I shall be glad to do so--Back Benchers, and indeed Opposition Front-Bench spokesmen, may have to go there on Sunday night. We cannot guarantee to be on parade at 10.30 on Monday morning unless we do that, especially in winter when the weather in Scotland can be bad.
I should therefore like my right hon. Friend to consider integrating the work of the House of Commons more closely with that of the Scottish Grand Committee so that, if possible, we meet on a Monday on which there is light business in Westminster so that we can return with our motor cars or whatever to our home bases and start out again. This is an important practical point which we must try to work at if we are to improve the logistics of meeting in various venues in Scotland, which I believe is an excellent idea. Another minor but important point is that we should be able to simplify our travelling, hotel and incidental expenses, for which we currently have to apply to different parts of the House of Commons for completion.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |