| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Steen: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I had merely introduced my question with a statement. I was about to come to my question. With respect, my introduction was only three or four sentences long. I ask to be able to complete my question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The hon. Gentleman cannot complete his question. He obviously needs to make his point in a speech. Interventions, by their nature, should be short.
Mr. Dowd: I will not respond to the hon. Member for South Hams (Mr. Steen), except to say that I believe that the Procedure Select Committee is looking at the changes that are needed in this regard. At the moment, we have the odd spectacle where the Ministry is claiming one thing but permitting an entirely different thing. Clearly, there would be worries for Northern Ireland legislation in the same way.
Mr. Steen: Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the problem with Europe is not so much the directives as the way that rules get around the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers? Up to 4,000 rules are coming into Britain and are being put into law without Parliament even seeing them.
Mr. Dowd: There is a problem, but, as I outlined earlier when contrasting the approach of the Government of the Republic of Ireland with our Government, Britain is developing a reputation for being the most officious in the way that it introduces many of the changes that our European partners have no difficulty in accommodating. I refer to the recent example of the change to metric weights for foodstuffs. The European regulation became more complicated than it actually was because of the way in which Whitehall interpreted it. I shall make a few more points before I--
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. I hope that the points of the hon. Gentleman relate to the order. He seems to be straying.
Mr. Dowd: The Minister outlined the general purpose of deregulatory legislation, and I am merely picking up on his points.
The deregulatory measures are a curious assortment of makeweights. Of the six that are mentioned by name, three were introduced by this Government; one was introduced
by a previous Conservative Government in 1957; one was introduced by a Labour Government; and one was introduced in 1695--I do not know which Government were in power then.
I refer to the horticultural produce provisions that state that the Food Safety (Northern Ireland) Order 1991 can safely deal with this issue. When that order was advanced in 1991, why was the relevant section of the horticultural produce provisions not repealed at the same time if it was performing the same purpose? The Weights and Measures (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 allows brewers to get their pay-off. I have seen figures that show that it would cost an additional 7p to ensure that all customers get a full pint--which is, after all, what they order. Whether we believe that or not, if it is taken at face value it suggests that the brewers are currently conning every customer in the pub out of 7p for each pint that is sold.
I draw the Minister's attention to the proposal for review of the Repeal of Auctions (Local Control) Act (Northern Ireland) 1957. He will know--especially in his capacity as a constituency Member--that Westminster in particular and, to a lesser extent, Camden have had considerable difficulties with bogus auctions in and around the Oxford street area. Members of the public, particularly tourists, are being rooked right, left and centre, and local trading standards officers believe that the current legislation is inadequate for them to protect visitors and residents.
Article 9 of the order provides for a considerable extension of powers. The Minister sought to downplay that, saying that it related merely to the enforcement regime, but article 9 extends powers not just to Ministers but to Departments. Elsewhere in the order, a Department is defined as
Powers are being transferred to civil servants as well as to Ministers.
The Minister said that the arrangements were different from the legislation in Great Britain. Legislation governing the rest of the United Kingdom provides that before any deregulation order is made, the Minister must
There is no equivalent in the order, although, as it contains deregulatory measures, I imagine that taxi drivers, for example, must have been consulted. I hope that the Minister will tell us whether those consultations will continue, or will take place if they have not yet occurred.
Article 10 explains how the provisions with respect of appeals will be prescribed. This relates to points made by other hon. Members. I seek an assurance that the provisions will not be used to undermine either employment protection or equality legislation--I shall return to that shortly. The part of the order dealing with contracting out is resented and opposed--or, at least, its implications are opposed--by many people throughout Northern Ireland. I admit that the Minister said that this was enabling legislation that would not necessarily make the arrangements compulsory, but I suspect that everyone realises that contracting out and the privatisation of many of the functions concerned will follow as night follows day.
The order also has implications for fair employment, policy appraisal and fair treatment guidelines and, in particular, women's employment. The background is
significantly different from the background to regulations in Great Britain. The Minister will be aware of a report by the Equal Opportunities Commission for Northern Ireland, which highlighted the disproportionately disadvantageous effect that contracting out in the health and education boards has had on female employment in particular. So disproportionate has that effect been that the commission called for the whole process of contracting out and privatisation to be suspended until the problem had been properly dealt with.
We are told:
policy appraisal and fair treatment--
Government activity is now clearly aimed at regulations, the bulk of which they have introduced themselves. That has not gone unnoticed in Northern Ireland, as elsewhere. I was intrigued to note that, at a recent dinner, Mr. Howard Hastings, the chairman of the Northern Ireland division of the Institute of Directors, slammed the contracting out of public sector services. I believe that the Minister's colleague, Baroness Denton, was present at the dinner when Mr. Hastings criticised the Department's performance, and said:
Mr. William Ross (East Londonderry):
We come to the second order of the evening, in which we have some interest, not least because, on 21 January 1994,my right hon. Friend the Member for Lagan Valley(Sir J. Molyneaux), speaking in a debate, said:
The Bill applies to Northern Ireland, but we find ourselves, two years later, removing some obstacles to the Bill's full implementation that should surely have been noticed and dealt with in the schedules to the original Bill. I hope that the Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office, who is to reply to the debate, will explain why it is necessary to deal with the matters in this way, and why it has taken two full years to catch up with the situation in the rest of the United Kingdom.
I have with me the 13 reports of the Select Committee on Deregulation, of which I am a member. I can also say for the second time this evening that I am also a member of the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments. The Chairman of the Deregulation Committee, the hon. Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Field), has written a number of letters to various Ministers asking why Northern Ireland was not included whenever something was deregulated. There is no good reason why that should not be so. I have raised that point several times during meetings of the Committee, and I have not been given a totally satisfactory answer.
We have been told on the Floor of the House over the years that it was necessary in order to preserve the Northern Ireland statute book. We have been told that it was necessary because the Northern Ireland statute book had to be preserved intact for the day when there would be a parliamentary legislative structure in Northern Ireland.
"the Head of such a Department".
"consult such organisations as appear to him to be representative of interests substantially affected by his proposals".
"It is difficult to see how compulsory competitive tendering could have been introduced in the way it was if a PAFT"--
"analysis had been made of its potential impact. PAFT offers us a way by which government departments can work together with different constituencies at community level to assess policies and ensure that they will undermine rather than compound inequalities in the labour market."
"Unfortunately, ministers cannot treat policies like Pepsi Cola, for changing the colour of the can will not make unworkable policies any more palatable . . . The public sector has been subjected to everything from Next-Steps Agencies to devolution and delayering . . . We have now reached the point in some agencies where the logo has become the more important than the logic."
"We must not be stalled by those who decline to move with the times. We should not ignore the stimulus contained in this week's Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill, which applies to Northern Ireland and bears the name of the Secretary of State. The powers to repeal and amend in the first four clauses could provide a solid launching pad for a campaign to open doors and gates that have remained closed for far too long."--[Official Report, 21 January 1994; Vol. 235, c. 1165.]
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |