| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
4.19 pm
Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West): I do not support the Bill, but I like the hon. Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant)--how could anyone dislike him? It is not the Labour party that is a threat to the hon. Gentleman's Bill, if he gets permission for it, but time and sanity. I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on becoming a Parliamentary Private Secretary, which is a humble but worthy job. It is the first greasy mark on the political pole, and we would all agree that few have greased more assiduously, or carried a ministerial lunch box with more colour and verve, than the hon. Member for Mid-Staffordshire.
There is a certain guile about the hon. Gentleman that neutralises his propensity to kiss the bottom of any passing figure of authority. He is visibly bursting with pride at becoming a ministerial gofer, which makes me rather sad. I do not see a Minister manque sitting opposite but a poor, wretched youth congratulating himself on getting the last cabin boy's job on the Titanic.
For all the qualities of the hon. Member for Mid-Staffordshire--and we all like him--his proposal is silly, as one would expect from its originator. It is silly in concept and timing. After all, the hon. Gentleman only has the overspill of a few days in October to present his Bill, if he gets permission. The chances of the Bill ever getting to the statute book are about as good as my chances of entering the kingdom of heaven.
Mr. Foulkes:
Or the shadow Cabinet.
Mr. Banks:
Yes, or the shadow Cabinet--which I have been assured by the Leader of the Opposition is one and the same place. If it is the same place, I have a good idea what God looks like.
The suggestion to fly more flags comes straight out of Evelyn Waugh, and so does the hon. Member for Mid-Staffordshire. Wrapping the Union flag around bankrupt policies or unfavourable Government opinion polls is typical of the Conservative party. It does that all the time, to cover its bankruptcy. Every time Opposition Members criticise the Government about their economic
performance, or whatever, they say that we are being unpatriotic and talking Britain down. The Government are running Britain down, when all we are doing is telling the truth.
The hon. Member for Mid-Staffordshire mentioned the great Samuel Johnson. Apart from Lichfield, I can think of one other similarity between Dr. Johnson and the hon. Gentleman, but kindness prevents me from saying precisely what it is.
Waving more flags is a pathetic response, but one expects that from a pathetic Government. It is obscene to use the flag as a way of suggesting that criticism of a policy or Government is tantamount to treason, and divides the country rather than unites it. The hon. Member said that the Union flag should be flown over Government construction projects. I would like him to name a few. There are plenty of flags flying over British manufacturing industry. Unfortunately, they tend to be the national flags of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and Germany.
The hon. Gentleman is also using his Bill as a way of getting at devolution. There is much talk in the House about subsidiarity. Devolution is subsidiarity--national subsidiarity. A flag should be a symbol of national unity, not used to paper over injustices and divisions that should be addressed. I often visit the United States, and it is true that one sees that country's flag everywhere. America is more united in that respect, because so many powers have been devolved to individual states, which also have their own flags.
The hon. Gentleman's Bill is a silly proposal, but at least Mr. Simon Hoggart now has some more cheap copy for tomorrow, in his love-hate relationship with the hon. Member for Mid-Staffordshire.
Question put, pursuant to Standing Order No. 19 (Motions for leave to bring in Bills and nomination of Select Committees at commencement of public business), and negatived.
DELEGATED LEGISLATION
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(6) (Standing Committees on Delegated Legislation),
Question agreed to.
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 102(9) (European Standing Committees),
Question agreed to.
Motion made, and Question proposed,
Question, That the amendment be made, put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 102 (European Standing Committees):--
That the draft Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers' Compensation) (Payment of Claims) Amendment Regulations 1996, which were laid before this House on 16th July, be approved.--[Mr. McLoughlin.]
That this House takes note of European Community Document No. 4198/96, relating to methods of trapping wild animals; shares the Government's concern that the Commission's proposals represent a significant weakening of the existing Council regulation agreed unanimously in 1991; and supports the Government's view that the Community must make it clear to fur-exporting countries through Community legislation that it maintains a strong commitment to end the use of leghold traps worldwide.--[Mr. McLoughlin.]
That this House takes note of European Community Documents Nos. 7833/96, relating to management guidelines for the fourth generation of Multi-Annual Guidance Programmes, 7827/96 on restructuring the Community fisheries sector, and 7701/96, relating to the establishment of a satellite-based vessel monitoring system; and the unnumbered Explanatory Memoranda submitted by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on 8th July 1996 laying down technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources; on 6th July 1996 on a fisheries agreement between the European Community and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania; on 8th July 1996 on a fisheries agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Angola; on 8th July 1996 on a fisheries agreement between the European Community and Sao Tome e Principe; and on 9th July 1996 on progress of the Multi-Annual Guidance Programme for the fishing fleet at the end of 1995; and supports the Government's resolve to achieve improvements in the Common Fisheries Policy, in particular in relation to the conservation and rational exploitation of the resources on which United Kingdom fishermen depend, and the Government's commitment to seeking Treaty changes at the Inter-Governmental Conference in order to address the issue of quota hopping.--[Mr. McLoughlin.]
Amendment proposed: at the end of the Question, to add--
'and calls on Her Majesty's Government to recognise and draw to the attention of other Member States of the European Community that the genesis and evolution of the current Common Fisheries Policy is flawed by past misrepresentation, coercion by qualified majority vote, inequity between Member States, and impracticality in operation, and is thus incapable of achieving the objectives of conservation of fisheries and the marine environment that can yield sustainable catches and consequent stability of income and employment in fishing communities; and thus believes that these objectives can only be achieved by a new policy created and sustained by mutual agreement between those Member States possessing internationally recognised fishery interests working in co-operation to achieve these universally desirable ends.'.--[Mr. Spearing.]
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |