| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Newton: That was an exceptionally long list of questions, but I will do my best with it. On the question of an Opposition day, I take the hon. Lady's comments as a representation for a day in the following week and I will certainly bear that in mind.
I thank the hon. Lady for her reiteration of the indications of support of the right hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) for Northern Ireland legislation in the possible circumstances that were described yesterday.
On the economic debate on Monday, hon. Members know that there has been much pressure over a period of time for a spring economic debate as well as a summer one. I have been glad to find time for one, albeit at fairly short notice. I do not intend it as a replacement for the summer economic debate and I will bear in mind the hon. Lady's point about longer notice, if it is possible.
On the Education (School Premises) Regulations, the hon. Lady knows that the background to the matter is that Opposition Members pressed hard to see the final version while the Nursery Education and Grant-Maintained Schools Bill was in Committee. As a result, the Government have gone to considerable lengths to try to make sure that the Opposition had the chance to consider the text of the regulations and now to provide for a debate. I accept that that has led to the regulations, because of the speeding up in response to Opposition representations, appearing in a less than ideal form. I will try to make sure that they are available in a tidier form at the earliest possible moment, with a view to helping the debate next week.
On the Dearing report on 16 to 19-year-olds, I will keep in mind the hon. Lady's request for a statement and bring it to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment.
On legal aid, I cannot make an off-the-cuff promise of a debate, but the hon. Lady may be aware that my right hon. Friend the Lord Chancellor has recently published some regulations on the matter, which might provide an opportunity. I will certainly look into it.
On scrutiny, no; the Government have not set their face against accepting recommendations for debate, whether in Committee or on the Floor of the House. We need to consider them on their merits on each occasion, althoughI accept that there may sometimes be differences of opinion about what is appropriate.
On the IGC and the White Paper, we intend to provide for a debate as usual before the Turin meeting, and the White Paper should be published in good time for that debate. I anticipate publication somewhat earlier than the third week in March.
Sir Dudley Smith (Warwick and Leamington):
May I echo what the hon. Lady said about legal aid and the need for a debate about some of the abuses that are going on? Is my right hon. Friend aware that I have two constituents who were married to a Mr. Luis Vianna--a Portuguese national--who has not paid a penny piece to them or the four children he has had by them? Yet, there are good grounds for thinking that he has had upwards of half a million pounds in legal aid to pursue those families in the courts, despite the fact that he is a business man and a property developer.
Mr. Newton:
My hon. Friend would not expect me to comment on a specific case from the Dispatch Box, but the regulations that my right hon. Friend the Lord Chancellor laid before Parliament on Tuesday, to whichI referred, are intended to strengthen the arrangements for means-testing the "apparently wealthy". Those regulations will come into effect on 1 June 1996.
Mr. Chris Davies (Littleborough and Saddleworth):
Will the Leader of the House give hon. Members the opportunity to debate the report published by the Audit Commission in the past few hours, called "Streetwise", which reveals that of 120,000 police officers only about 6,000 are on patrol at any one time and most of those in cars? Hon. Members will no doubt want to point out the importance of patrolling officers to members of a community as a source of reassurance, and to discuss the disparity in performance between different constabularies.
Mr. Newton:
We welcome this latest Audit Commission report and I have no doubt that it will be carefully studied. We hope that it will lead to further improvements in police effectiveness. The Government's commitment to police patrol is clear, not least in the funding recently announced, which is sufficient for an additional 5,000 officers in the next three years.
Mr. Edward Garnier (Harborough):
Will my right hon. Friend find an early opportunity for a debate on defence procurement, so that we can discuss the order for three new type 23 frigates announced yesterday? Would it not be helpful, not only to Conservative but to Opposition Members, to have a day on defence procurement so that we can discover if the Opposition have any policies on it, not least in the light of their appalling attitude towards defence spending at the last election?
Mr. Newton:
It is certainly an interesting idea, but it is not long since we had the annual debate on the Navy; the annual debate on the RAF is the only one outstanding. Although I accept that it might be a bit difficult to discuss frigates during that debate, it would provide my hon. Friend with an opportunity to make some observations about defence procurement generally.
Mr. Alfred Morris (Manchester, Wythenshawe):
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the plight of the 3,100 people with haemophilia who were contaminated with hepatitis C by NHS blood products? Is he aware of how many have died or are dying and of the terms of my hugely supported, all-party, early-day motion about the tragedy? If he is, will he try to persuade the Health Secretary to make an oral statement next week in response to the motion?
Mr. Newton:
As the right hon. Gentleman and indeed you, Madam Speaker, will know, of course I am aware, from my former experience as a Minister for Health, of that tragedy. On the right hon. Gentleman's other points, he will be aware that that matter has been raised with me on a number of occasions by my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Marshall) and I am afraid that I cannot add to what I said on those occasions, but I will draw the matter to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health.
Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire):
When may we have a debate on Northern Ireland? It is a long time since we had a full day's debate, and a debate on the Adjournment would enable Members to express their opinions on recent developments and proposals.
Mr. Newton:
I will, of course, bear in mind my hon. Friend's request.
Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover):
Will the right hon. Gentleman arrange for a statement on a subject that was raised during Agriculture questions today, namely the allocation of set-aside money? Is he aware that large sums of set-aside money were paid out to members of the aristocracy or landed gentry? May we have a guarantee as to what conditions apply to what happens to that money? Will some of it finish up in the Tory party coffers before the next general election? As Prince Charles has received more than £500,000 in set-aside money, may we have a guarantee that he will not be using it to set aside the Princess of Wales?
Mr. Newton:
So far as I am aware, the rules on set-aside are of general application and I see no reason why those whom the hon. Gentleman chooses to describe as the landed gentry should be excluded. As to what they do with their funds, that appears to me to be a matter for them.
Mr. Rupert Allason (Torbay):
Is my hon. Friend aware that there is great concern about the Kingskerswell bypass and the fact that it has been put on the list for long-term development? Is he aware that it is a vital lifeline for south Devon? It is an economic priority and it is to my great regret that I did not add it to my list of demands on Monday evening. Will he now please accept that, as a PS, I would like to do so.
Mr. Newton:
I was not aware of any demands that my hon. Friend made on Monday evening; I am sure that his co-operation was given most willingly. I shall bring his representations to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport.
Rev. Martin Smyth (Belfast, South):
I feel like the importunate woman coming again to ask the Lord President for a meeting of the Northern Ireland Grand Committee. Is he in a position to answer my request positively, because of the justice of its case and the necessity to have such a meeting?
Mr. Newton:
Without accepting the hon. Gentleman's description of himself, I have no objection at all to his raising the matter with me again as I have a piece of paper on which it says that, subject to the agreement of all concerned, I hope next week to table the necessary motion for the specific debate for which the hon. Gentleman asked me last week or the week before. I hope that it will be possible to arrange for the meeting to be held on21 March, which may be a convenient date, but of course that would be subject to the agreement of everyone concerned.
Mr. Julian Brazier (Canterbury):
May I urge my right hon. Friend to set aside a day as soon as possible for a debate on regional assemblies and regional government?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |