| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Rev. Martin Smyth (Belfast, South): I welcome the announcement that the Second Reading of the Northern
28 Nov 1996 : Column 483
Ireland Arms Decommissioning Bill will take place on 9 December. Is it possible, if it is within the Government's remit, to have lodged in the Library with the Government papers the letter from the hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume), together with the reply? Can the Leader of the House persuade the hon. Member for Foyle to lodge it himself, so that we might have a proper background for the debate?
Mr. Newton: I am not sure how much power of persuasion I would have--I say this entirely neutrally--with the hon. Member for Foyle. That is clearly a matter for him. He will no doubt note the hon. Gentleman's comments, as, I am sure, will my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich): In view of the comments of the Leader of the House about civil servants, I am sure that he will be happy to note that the ministerial reply to a planted question that appeared at 3.30 today threatened many civil servants in the traffic offices in Cardiff and Manchester with the loss of their jobs, as well as moves about the country. He has made it clear that temporary arrangements will be made to cover the Welsh traffic office. The closure of the two offices is to go ahead irrespective of the needs of the road haulage industry or of those who need protection from the cowboys in that industry. Will the Leader of the House provide time in the coming week for a debate on the Floor of the House on the fact that the taxpayer will have to pay more than £80,000 to the landlords of the area traffic office in Manchester as a result of the move to Leeds? When that office moves, there will be two area traffic offices, one on one floor, the other on the second. Anyone applying for different regions will have to write separate cheques to separate offices in the same place to pay for the same service. That will not be convenient for those of my constituents who need that help.
Mr. Newton: I know that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport considered the position carefully before making his proposals, but I shall, of course, bring the hon. Lady's remarks to his attention.
Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover): Why does the Leader of the House not resolve the problem about the two-day debate? I sense that, somehow or other, the Government will get themselves into another mess--although I am not against that.
The stability pact was not scrutinised. A row took place in the Commons and pro and anti-marketeers said that they wanted a debate. The Leader of the House has now said that we are to have a debate. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said last Monday that he would go to the meeting on Monday and do nothing. He is going to reserve his position--he talked about parliamentary scrutiny, reserve or whatever it is called. So nothing will change.
Then the Leader of the House says that he cannot be sure about the form of words and we shall have to have an Adjournment debate, but we could have a motion; it depends on what happens. Unless he told us something that he is not going to do, we know that nothing will change, because the Chancellor has said so.
28 Nov 1996 : Column 484
If the Leader of the House wants to resolve the matter, he should make some arrangements with our Front Bench for a form of words for a motion. Otherwise there will be another almighty row. He should give those of us on both sides of the House who do not want to go any further towards a stability pact the chance to vote on it at the appropriate time.
Mr. Newton:
As must by now be clear, I think that I have been entirely reasonable. I wish that I had succeeded in eliciting a more reasonable response from the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner). I should like to see him trying to agree a form of words with his Front Bench.
Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire):
The resolution supported by the Select Committee on European Legislation is still on the Order Paper as No. 34 of the Remaining Orders of the Day, under the heading, "Economic and Monetary Union". It deals with the matter raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner). Would it not be sensible to give the opportunity of at least a vote on the matter, to be taken forthwith, with an amendment then being moved, along the lines of the wording of the resolution, and supported by the Select Committee? The process of scrutiny would then have been discharged in the House before the ECOFIN meeting. The situation is peculiar, with a scrutiny reserve on negotiations that are crucial for the future development of the House.
Mr. Newton:
I am not quite sure what the hon. Gentleman has in mind when he refers to something happening in advance of ECOFIN, bearing in mind the fact that today is Thursday and the ECOFIN meeting is on Monday.
Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North):
Does the Leader of the House recall that I raised last week the case of my constituent, Raghbir Singh, who has been held in prison for 18 months without any charges and who continues to be imprisoned despite a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights on a similar case that a person who was held for five years should be released, and has subsequently been released? Why does my constituent continue to be in prison? Why does not the Home Secretary make a statement as quickly as possible? Is the Leader of the House aware that I continue to ring the Home Secretary's private office to find out what is happening? Is there any way in which the Leader of the House can help?
Mr. Newton:
Perhaps I can draw the hon. Gentleman's attention to the fact that my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary is due to answer questions on Thursday. With the hon. Gentleman's usual assiduousness, I would imagine that he will want to be present then to put that question directly. I shall bring the matter to my right hon. and learned Friend's attention.
Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West):
Is not it time for a debate on electoral reform? Should we not plug the loophole that allows unlimited sums of money to be spent on the coming general election, as long as it is called "national spending"? Does the Leader of the House recall it being said in a debate in 1991 that it was possible for a foreign billionaire, however malign his intentions,
28 Nov 1996 : Column 485
Mr. Newton:
Would the hon. Gentleman's Bill extend to the kind of trade union advertising that can be seen in the newspapers at the moment?
Mr. Greville Janner (Leicester, West):
May we have a debate on the sad and shameful decision of the Swiss Council of States to water down the decree that was unanimously passed by its National Council to ascertain the truth about Nazi gold in that country? Is the Leader of the House aware that that is contrary to assurances that were given to the right hon. Member for Wirral, West (Mr. Hunt) and myself by the distinguished Swiss Foreign Minister, Flavio Cotti, only last week and by other parliamentarians of both major parties in both their houses? As the vast majority of Swiss people--certainly those of this generation--want to discover the truth and do justice to the victims of Nazism even at this very late date, and as I am sure we would all want the good name of that great country restored, may we have a chance to explain in the House our unanimous concern about the matter and our hope that the decision of the upper house will yet be overruled?
Mr. Newton:
I was aware of the visit to Switzerland that the hon. and learned Gentleman paid with my right hon. Friend the Member for Wirral, West (Mr. Hunt), and of the concerns that the hon. and learned Gentleman wishes to express. He will understand that the right course for me to take is to bring his remarks to the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary.
Mr. John Marshall (Hendon, South):
May I echo the plea of the hon. and learned Member for Leicester, West (Mr. Janner) for a debate on the Swiss banking system? It is quite wrong that it should squirrel away assets that belong to other people and use its secrecy as a means of depriving the victims of the holocaust of money that is truly theirs.
Mr. Newton:
I will ensure that my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary has his attention drawn also to my hon. Friend's remarks, as a clear indication that there is concern on both sides of the House about the matter.
Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. The two 15-minute slots a week in which we can ask the Prime Minister questions are rather important to the House, and despite various criticisms--sometimes rather ill-informed--from outside, it is the House's wish that those two slots should remain. We understand the time that is taken by the Prime Minister and my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition in asking and replying to questions, but it is unfortunate that the slot should be used to make a statement. I wish to draw your attention to the fact that the Prime Minister spent a great deal of time today answering a question from the hon. Member for Basingstoke (Mr. Hunter). His answer seemed like a substitute for a statement.
4.54 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |