House of Commons Hansard Debates for 31 Oct 1996 (pt 5)

Mr. Newton: On the first question, I shall consider, as I always do, requests for debates, whether on economic matters or anything else. I hope that the hon. Lady will bear it in mind the opportunities provided by Opposition days. In view of what she said, she may want to explain the fact that, as far as I can recall, the last time that the Opposition chose anything that could be called an economic debate in their time is as far back as July 1995. Given the terms in which she described the economy, I find that odd.

Secondly, on leasehold reform, I think that the hon. Lady may be referring to the proposals that were published in draft some time ago in respect of commonhold rather than leasehold. She may be confusing those two distinct issues. I am not yet in a position to say more on that.

On combat knives, I did not think that the Prime Minister's remarks were in any way churlish. He made it clear that he was aware that the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) had written to the Home Secretary, and said that he expected that a meeting would take place. My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary's approach to that meeting will certainly be constructive because it has always been clear that there is no dispute about the desirability of banning offensive weapons but that the matter depends on being able effectively to define them. To anyone who doubts our willingness to do so, I should say that we have banned 14 such weapons over the past few years and given the police powers to stop and search for them--powers which the Labour party argued against.

31 Oct 1996 : Column 787

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made the position on BSE entirely clear at Prime Minister's questions, and I shall not add to what he said.

Sir John Cope (Northavon): When will the Government publish the report by Lord Lloyd of Berwick on anti-terrorist legislation? When it is published, will we have a chance to debate it?

Mr. Newton: I can be clear about publication. My right hon. and learned Friends the Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland have published the report today and have placed a copy in the Library. The Government will obviously want to study the recommendations and respond formally in due course. That would be the appropriate time to consider whether a debate is necessary.

Mr. Archy Kirkwood (Roxburgh and Berwickshire): As the Leader of the House has left some time spare in the second week of business that he announced today, will he give hon. Members on both sides an early idea of when the Second Reading of the Firearms (Amendment) Bill, which is about to be published, will be? Will he say a word about the representations that have been made to him through the usual channels about the possibility of a day in Committee of the whole House on the Bill shortly after the Second Reading?

Mr. Newton: I hope that I am always as helpful to the House as I can be. I certainly take note of the hon. Gentleman's request. As he knows, the Bill has not yet been published. He will also know that it is not usual practice to go into detail about discussions held through the usual channels, but I am sure that the representations that he mentioned will be taken into account.

Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham): May we have a debate on offensive weapons and knives? Sadly, a young man in my constituency was killed with a knife recently, but it was a kitchen knife, which would not be covered by the term "combat knife". Does that not show that easy definitions are not easy to come by and that the Opposition's opportunism is to be despised?

Mr. Newton: That shows not only the difficulty of definition, but that all sorts of knives would not be banned under any definition. Nobody would argue in favour of banning kitchen knives, but they can, nevertheless, be used to inflict considerable damage.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover): Is the Leader of the House aware that, since April this year, the Secretary of State for Social Security has failed to report to the House on the recommendations of the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council to change the rules relating to chronic bronchitis, which currently result in only 11 per cent. of applicants obtaining benefit? I have told the House before that, as a result of all the representations that have been made, we fully expected the Secretary of State for Social Security to come to the House before now and, we hope, accept the new proposals from that important advisory council. What is going on? Does the Secretary of State

31 Oct 1996 : Column 788

for Social Security not care about the miners who are coughing their lungs up? Is he waiting for them to die? Let us have a statement.

Mr. Newton: As I well know from my ministerial experience, such matters are complicated and they require detailed examination. My right hon. Friend will announce his decision as soon as he can.

Mr. Bob Dunn (Dartford): Is there any chance of an early, urgent debate on the link between home ownership and mortgage interest relief? Conservative Members want to demonstrate their support for that relief and to argue in favour of adjusting it upwards, whereas the Labour party, in particular the hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Raynsford), wants mortgage interest relief abolished.

Next Section

Index

Home Page