| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Sanctions (Libya)
Q4. Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will discuss with President Clinton the consequences for (a) the imposition of sanctions on Libya and (b) the case against Libyan nationals of the dismissal of James Thurman from the service of the United States Government. [15310]
The Prime Minister: I have no plans to do so. The case against the two accused Libyans does not depend on any evidence that Mr. Thurman might give.
Mr. Dalyell: Has Thurman been reassigned to other duties for fabricating forensic evidence?
The Prime Minister: I am certainly not aware that that is the case. If the hon. Gentleman has any information that it is, or any information that he thinks bears on this matter--
Mr. Dalyell: It is in the New York Times.
The Prime Minister: If the hon. Gentleman will forgive me, I am not an avid and daily reader of the New York Times. If he has any information that is pertinent to this case, and would care to provide me with it, I will certainly undertake to have it carefully examined.
Sir Teddy Taylor: As senior Scottish advocates have said that it would be impossible for the two accused to have a fair trial in Scotland because of press publicity, and as the Libyan Government have now stated that they will hand over the two accused to the Arab League for committal to trial in The Hague or anywhere else, would it not help those who lost their relatives and friends at Lockerbie to have the issue resolved? My right hon. Friend is, as we all know, basically a straight, decent person, so will he endeavour to solve the problem and stop simply engaging in the throwing of insults? Could we not solve it in the interests of those who lost their relatives and friends at Lockerbie?
The Prime Minister: I certainly want a solution to this problem. We would like a solution as much as the relatives, but we need a proper criminal trial and there are genuine and practical difficulties in trying to establish such a trial in a third country. I think that many hon. Members, including--if my hon. Friend will permit me to say so--me, would, on grounds of principle, find a trial in a third country very difficult to accept. [Hon. Members: "Why?"] I shall tell hon. Members why. It could suggest that a trial in Scotland or the United States would not be fair.
I am not prepared to accept that premise in terms of a trial in Scotland. Nor do I think that it would be remotely attractive for us to allow alleged terrorists to dictate where they may or may not be tried. That would be a bad principle. The Security Council resolutions say that they should be tried in Scotland or the United States--two countries with a particular interest in the matter.
I have to add that I am very doubtful that the Libyans would deliver the accused for such a trial, even if one were to be set up, but, for the reasons that I have set out, the trial should be either in Scotland, which would be the preference, or in the United States.
Q5. Mr. McKelvey:
To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 February. [15311]
The Prime Minister:
I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave some moments ago.
Mr. McKelvey:
Does the Prime Minister share my genuine concern about the outrageous activities of the directors of Camelot in attempting to take gambling on the lottery into every home in the land and extend their links with rather devious gambling projects abroad? Would it not be possible for him to stop this development? Otherwise, he will leave a legacy of children who were brought up in the midst of gambling mania.
The Prime Minister:
As the hon. Gentleman knows, the lottery is very tightly regulated and there will be no changes to the structure or content of the constituent games without the specific involvement of the director general. The Government have no intention of allowing the good name of the lottery to be jeopardised. I think that the hon. Gentleman would share my pleasure at the sheer scale of the resources produced by the lottery for good causes. Today, for example, the heritage lottery fund is awarding £140 million to 24 of the nation's best loved museums.
Mr. Stephen:
Does my right hon. Friend agree that efficient professional administration is vital to the success of the national health service? Does he recall that, when we decided to modernise the system by getting rid of the whole regional tier of NHS bureaucracy, the Labour party was against it? What does he therefore think of its promises to save money on NHS bureaucracy?
The Prime Minister:
I agree with my hon. Friend that there were substantial savings to be made by the abolition
Electoral Registration
Q6. Mr. Barnes: To ask the Prime Minister if he will introduce proposals to encourage registration on supplementary lists of those missing from electoral registers before the announcement of the date of the general election. [15312]
The Prime Minister: I see no need to do so. The vast majority of eligible electors are registered and a well-established claims procedure exists for those who are not.
Mr. Barnes: Why will the Government not publish the number of people who are currently on electoral registers? What have they got to hide? Are the figures as bad as they were last year, when at least 2 million people were missing from the registers? Why cannot we have a massive campaign to put people on supplementary lists, which could be added to lists of those who are eligible to vote at the general election? The Halifax building society organised a massive campaign for what it called its "big vote". The general election is the biggest vote of all, and all our people should be entitled to exercise their vote.
The Prime Minister: I, of course, agree with that. The Conservative party has done all it can to ensure that people are registered to vote at the general election. As for the figures for which the hon. Gentleman asked, the 1996 electoral registers for the United Kingdom contained just under 44 million names--the highest number ever. New registers came into force on 16 February, and the figures for them should be available by the end of March.
Business of the House
3.30 pm
Mrs. Ann Taylor (Dewsbury): May I ask the Leader of the House for details of future business?
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton): The business for next week will be as follows: Monday 24 February--Opposition Day [6th allotted day].
There will be a debate on the national health service on an Opposition motion.
Tuesday 25 February--Until about 7 pm, Second Reading of the Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Bill [Lords].
Proceedings on the following Bills, which are consolidation measures: the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Bill [Lords]; the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Bill [Lords]; the Planning (Hazardous Substances) (Scotland) Bill [Lords]; and the Planning (Consequential Provisions) (Scotland) Bill [Lords].
Remaining stages of the National Heritage Bill [Lords].
Remaining stages of the Civil Procedure Bill [Lords].
Remaining stages of the Sex Offenders Bill.
Wednesday 26 February--Until 2 pm, there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Motion on section 5 of the European Communities (Amendment) Act.
Remaining stages of the Contract (Scotland) Bill.
Remaining stages of the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman and Commissioner for Local Administration in Scotland Bill.
Remaining stages of the Flood Prevention and Land Drainage (Scotland) Bill.
Thursday 27 February--Debate on Welsh affairs on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Friday 28 February--Private Members' Bills.
Once again, I am unable to give much information about the following week, but on Monday 3 March I expect to propose that we take the remaining stages of the Welsh Development Agency Bill.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |