---

Mr. Newton: I cannot make an immediate promise to watch the programme tonight, but I shall try to ensure that I view it subsequently, or at least gain a clear idea of what it says. I am sure that that will be true also of my right hon. and learned Friends the Home Secretary and the Attorney-General.

Mr. John Marshall (Hendon, South): May we have an early debate on the situation in Cyprus, so that we can emphasise the need for Cyprus's application to join the European Union to be determined as a matter of urgency, regardless of whether there has been a political solution--welcome and necessary as that political solution would be?

Mr. Newton: I take note of my hon. Friend's suggestion and will bring it to the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary.

Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich): Does the Leader of the House consider that the debate on the Channel Tunnel Rail Link Bill next week would be an ideal opportunity for the Secretary of State for Transport to make a statement about the safety case for reopening the channel tunnel? The right hon. Gentleman could come to the House and publish all the evidence on which the opening has been based, to reassure the general public that the service is now safe, and that the reopening is a responsible act which people will welcome.

Mr. Newton: My right hon. Friend said that he would respond appropriately when the reports of the various inquiries that have been set up are available to him. Meanwhile, I understand that the intergovernmental commission, taking into account the advice of the independent Channel Tunnel Safety Authority, has raised no objection to the resumption of commercial passenger services through the tunnel, and undertook last Sunday an exercise that was one of several conditions that had to be

5 Dec 1996 : Column 1210

fulfilled to the safety authority's satisfaction before the authority was prepared to make a favourable recommendation.

Mr. Ian Bruce (South Dorset): May we have an early debate on the Commission for Racial Equality? Hon. Members know that many millions of pounds are voted for that organisation. It appears to be a fairly large waste of money, not least because, in recent days, an hon. Member made a racial attack on Finnish people because they were white and had blue eyes, and no action has yet been taken against that person, who, obviously, was trying to incite Afro-Caribbean people to hatred of those people.

Mr. Newton: I am sure that my hon. Friend's remarks, like those to which he refers, will be studied with great care by that organisation.

Mr. Alex Salmond (Banff and Buchan): Speaking in my role as the only political leader who understands Scotland--[Laughter.]--according to Labour party research--may I ask the Leader of the House for an immediate debate into some vital research documents that have been made public? Is the Leader of the House aware that people in Scotland seem to believe that the Leader of the Opposition is smarmy, untrustworthy and a Tory, but believe that the Prime Minister is ineffective, wimpish and a Tory? Does not that represent a crisis of Unionist leadership, which the House must address before Christmas?

Mr. Newton: The perceptions reported in the research seem somewhat mixed. One is bound to question them in view of the hon. Gentleman's initial point about attitudes to him.

Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham): May I support the calls for a debate on the reform of the House of Lords? We have heard how the Opposition would destroy the second House of the United Kingdom Parliament, but they have not been clear about a replacement. On the one hand, they propose to promote 700 of Blair's boys and girls to the other House--which strikes me as sleaze on a grand scale--and, on the other hand, they propose elections to a second House which would compete with the democratic authority of this place.

Mr. Newton: Clearly demand for such a debate is growing by the minute, and I take careful note of it.

Mrs. Anne Campbell (Cambridge): Is the Leader of the House aware that a recent answer to a parliamentary question revealed that the Government have decided not to proceed with the sale of the Royal Greenwich observatories in my constituency? With the fate of so many other public sector research establishments hanging in the balance, will the Leader of the House call upon the President of the Board of Trade to make an early decision about those sales and make a statement to the House so that he may be questioned about the chaos that has resulted from the prior options review?

Mr. Newton: It will not surprise the hon. Lady to learn that I do not accept her terminology. The Government's purpose is to find the best way forward for those

5 Dec 1996 : Column 1211

organisations and to secure the best possible futures for them. I am sure that my right hon. Friend will examine her remarks with interest.

Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): Did the Leader of the House hear the earlier question from the hon. and learned Member for Burton (Sir. I. Lawrence) and the ensuing rather shameful exchange when the Home Secretary endorsed the intemperate language of the hon. and learned Gentleman, who referred to the European Court of Human Rights as interfering, meddling foreigners? It is one thing for a Government Back Bencher to say that, but quite another for the Home Secretary to endorse his comments. I think that we should be very clear about the Government's attitude. Could there be some form of statement or explanation of the Government's real attitude towards the European Court of Human Rights?

Mr. Newton: The straightforward answer to the hon. Gentleman's question is that I was present for only the last two or three minutes of Home Office questions, so I am not in a position to comment directly. I am surprised at the hon. Gentleman's interpretation of the exchange, but, as I am not in a position to comment, I shall draw his remarks to the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend.

Mr. William O'Brien (Normanton): In view of the widespread outbreaks of different strains of meningitis around the country, and the fact that some medical health officers are warning people of more possible outbreaks and some hospitals are opening closed wards to prepare for any such developments this winter, will the Leader of the House agree to a debate on that subject next week? It is an urgent matter about which many people have expressed anxiety. Will the Secretary of State for Health make a statement to the House allowing hon. Members to express their concerns? We need some policy guidance on how the Government plan to combat any further outbreaks of meningitis.

Mr. Newton: When outbreaks occur, guidelines are published and the outbreak teams follow them. I am quite sure that, if anything fresh emerges following the statement earlier this week by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales about the outbreak in Cardiff, appropriate guidance will be considered. I shall bring the hon. Gentleman's concerns to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health.

Rev. Martin Smyth (Belfast, South): I welcome the fact that next Monday we are to debate the Northern Ireland Arms Decommissioning Bill, but the Leader of the House and right hon. and hon. Members will be aware that, throughout the past 28 years, service men and others have been severely injured and women have been widowed. Therefore, I press the Leader of the House for a statement so that we can examine what has been reported in the press, for many of us missed the earlier exchanges. My attention was drawn to the problems as a result of the case of Charles McConaghy, a former constituent, who was blinded and deafened, as well as receiving other injuries, in an IRA explosion. Under the new terms, he is losing about £50 a week in

5 Dec 1996 : Column 1212

compensation. Can we have a debate on that, because what have been called sweeteners seem to be saccharin--a substitute for the real thing?

Mr. Newton: The hon. Gentleman fairly acknowledged that he had not heard the earlier exchanges. I am not in a position to comment on a particular case, but as we are talking about medical advice that would affect future decisions, the hon. Gentleman might do well to examine with care what has already been said.

Mr. Robert Maclennan (Caithness and Sutherland): May I lend the support of my right hon. and hon. Friends to the call that has been made three times in these exchanges from the right hon. Gentlemen's own Benches for a debate on the future of the House of Lords? That would enable us to consider in particular the view expressed yesterday by the Leader of the House of Lords that hereditary peers are more representative of the common man than are hon. Members elected to this House.

Mr. Newton: I note that support for such a debate has now spread from one side of the House to the other, which means that I must take even more notice.

Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West): When may we debate the question that the whole country is asking today: have the Government gone mad? All of us receive letters weekly from embittered ex-service men and women who feel that they have been cheated by the Government. They believe that they have sacrificed their health for their country, yet they are to be cheated again of £50 million. When will we debate that?

---