| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Newton: I live in hope that the next Opposition Day, for which I was pressed only a little while ago, might be used to unveil a little more of the Opposition's policies on those matters, but if that fails, of course I shall consider my hon. Friend's proposal.
Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North): Will the Prime Minister be making a statement on his trip to Hong Kong? In the post-Nolan climate, does the Leader of the House recognise how essential it is that the Prime Minister answers the question that was put to him earlier today: is money being collected by rich business people to help the Tory party at the next election? We are entitled to know and the Prime Minister should make a statement on his return.
Mr. Newton: The House will have heard the exchanges with my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister and I certainly do not intend to add to what he said. I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will consider whether it seems appropriate for him to make a statement on his trip at the appropriate time.
Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham): I echo the regret expressed by the Labour spokesman that there will not be an Opposition day next week and perhaps none the week after. We could debate the threat to grammar schools, or the threat to grant-maintained schools, or the threat to fundholding practices or the threat to the free and efficient operation of the labour market--all of which are Labour party policies.
Mr. Newton: On Monday we may well discuss the threat to the labour market; we recently debated fundholding practices, on which some important points were made; and a Bill is currently before the House which will enable points to be made about grant-maintained schools.
Mr. Gerald Bermingham (St. Helens, South): Suttons, a large transport company, operates in my constituency. Will the Secretary of State for Transport come before the House and explain how he intends to implement the Brussels directive with respect to eyesight? At present, it looks as though drivers will be asked to read numberplates from a distance without using their glasses or contact lenses because Brussels says that they may be a danger if people are involved in an accident. As a result, up to 100,000 lorry drivers will lose their jobs, which cannot be right.
Mr. Newton: Last week, I said that the points made by the hon. Gentleman appeared to be exaggerated. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport is due to answer questions on Monday 11 March.
Mr. John Austin-Walker (Woolwich): Earlier this week, I raised a question with the Secretary of State for the Environment about the problem of rising groundwater
levels in London and the threat of flooding. I asked him what he was going to do about the potential threat to the London Underground and buildings. He said that no Government building is in imminent danger, as far as he is aware. He is washing his hands of the affair. Thames Water is unwilling to drill the wells that would alleviate the situation as it is uneconomic: there is no shortage of water in London, despite the fact that in other areas there have been drought orders. Will he find time for a debate on the lack of co-ordinated planning in the water industry, and the problems faced by a fragmented and privatised water industry?
Mr. Newton: It will not surprise the hon. Gentleman to know that I do not accept the latter part of his remarks, which seem to be extremely tendentious. I will bring his concerns to the attention of my right hon. Friend, and it may be that the hon. Gentleman will wish to look to a Wednesday morning for such a debate.
Mr. Harry Greenway (Ealing, North): May we have a debate next week on housing allocations policy so that I can bring before the House a leaked letter from a Labour Ealing councillor asking for council accommodation for a family living outside Ealing and, therefore, not on Ealing's list, but known to be Labour supporters? The councillor is seeking to build up Labour party support in that area of my constituency. Could we also discuss the fact that the chief executive of Ealing is to conduct an inquiry into this disgraceful and doubtful behaviour, but that she will be handicapped because the file concerned has gone missing?
Mr. Newton: My hon. Friend will not expect me to comment on the specific allegations, and I certainly shall not do so. I am sure that what he has referred to will be carefully investigated. The housing allocations policy is a matter that arises on the Housing Bill, which is currently before the House.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): I anticipate a guarded and cautious reply to this question: may we have a statement next week on a topic on which the House of Commons has been extremely reticent hitherto--the situation that has developed in the royal family in two respects. First, may we discuss the proposed role in some quarters of Diana Princess of Wales, because many hon. Members feel that it is unacceptable that she should be an ambassador in terms of policy or as a dispenser of aid? Secondly, if there are to be changes in the responsibility of the monarch for the education of royal heirs, should the House of Commons be consulted?
Mr. Newton: The hon. Gentleman correctly anticipated a guarded and cautious response, and he will duly receive one. I will say only that it seems to me that it is appropriate for the House of Commons to be reticent on these matters.
Mr. John Marshall (Hendon, South): Will my right hon. Friend arrange for an early debate on crime in London? Is he aware that Sir Paul Condon has been able to report a 75 per cent. increase in the number of muggers being arrested under Operation Eagle Eye? Is he also aware that there has been a large reduction in the number
of household burglaries in London under Operation Bumblebee? Is this not good news for the law-abiding majority in London?
Mr. Newton: That news about levels of crime is encouraging and, in my view, a tribute to the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and to his force, and to the measures that my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department has put in place.
Mr. Barry Field (Isle of Wight): May we have an early debate on the policy of clamping vehicles that do not display a vehicle excise duty licence, so far as its display and sale is concerned? I understand that the Liberal Democrats are encouraging people not to comply with this law because they believe that duty should be put on fuel, which would have a detrimental effect on people living in rural areas. I promise my right hon. Friend that if the debate led to rural post offices being allowed to sell the vehicle excise duty licence, there would be a cacophony of cancellation stamps on the counters of postmistresses and postmasters throughout the country. Rural areas throughout the United Kingdom would welcome such an initiative because the vehicle excise duty licensing department has prevented sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses from selling these licences for too long.
Mr. Newton: Leaving aside the continuing confusion in my mind about Liberal Democrat policy in these matters, I will undertake to bring those representations to the attention of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, who is the Minister concerned with the Post Office. However, some rural post offices--including the one in the village in which I live in Essex--can and do sell vehicle excise duty licences.
Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West): Will the Leader of the House arrange for next Thursday's debate to include a discussion on bank holidays, particularly the request made by every county council in Wales, which represent every person in Wales, that St. David's day be declared a bank holiday in Wales? That request was rejected contemptuously by a one-word reply from the Prime Minister. How dare the Prime Minister--whose party managed to get only 4 per cent. of the vote at the last by-election in Wales, and only 4 per cent. of the councillors in the last election in Wales--determine what should happen in Wales? Is this not proof that Wales has a large democratic deficit and is effectively being ruled by England as a colony?
Mr. Newton: That was as tortuous a question as I have ever heard, and I do not agree with the detail of it. It is particularly ungenerous on the day that we have staged the annual St. David's day Welsh debate. In the light of what has been said, I have ambitions to make sure that that debate takes place on a bank holiday and that the hon. Gentleman has to be here.
Mr. Andrew Mackinlay (Thurrock): May we have a debate on the disparity of treatment that clearing banks and other financial institutions extend to people who are facing bankruptcy? The Leader of the House will be aware of the article that appeared in The Sunday Times last week showing that Lord Younger of the Royal Bank of Scotland and Sir Gerrard Neale put together a rescue package for a Conservative Member of Parliament. Is this fair in relation to other businesses that are facing bankruptcy? May we have a debate so that we can probe that matter and argue the case for people who are struggling to keep their businesses alive but who cannot get the extended credit from the banks which has been afforded to an hon. Member of this House?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |