| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mrs. Taylor: I have had some discussions with my right hon. Friend, and she has had discussions with people in Northern Ireland. There have been a number of occasions recently on which Northern Ireland issues could be raised. In the business that I have announced today for next week and the following Monday, there are further opportunities.
Mr. John Cryer (Hornchurch): May I urge the Leader of the House to consider having two debates--first, on the creation of a Grand Committee for London, for which there is much support in this place and outside, and
secondly, a debate of at least two days on Europe and the Amsterdam summit, for which there is also much support on both sides of the House? If the timetable is tight, perhaps we could have the debate towards the end of July, or even in the first week of August.
Mrs. Ann Taylor: I am afraid that I cannot hold out a great deal of hope on either count. In respect of a Grand Committee for London, legislation directly affecting London will be introduced later in this Parliament, when there will be plenty of opportunity to debate some of the issues about which my hon. Friend may be concerned. We shall consider what debates it will be possible to hold at the end of July, and whether we can fulfil my hon. Friend's request for a two-day debate on Europe, but I fear that the timetable may be crowded.
Mr. Tim Collins (Westmorland and Lonsdale): Is it not extraordinary that the Leader of the House has said that there is to be no Government time next week for debating the outcome of the intergovernmental conference? Does she not recognise that that is a clear breach of the precedent set by the previous Government? When the previous Prime Minister returned from Maastricht, we had a full debate in the House within days of the conclusion of the Maastricht treaty. Is it not extraordinary that the Government are so ashamed of the Prime Minister's deal that the Leader of the House will not even agree to a two-day debate on Europe within the next month?
Mrs. Taylor: We had a full statement from the Prime Minister yesterday; we had a statement from my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on quota selling, which is a more appropriate description than quota hopping. The hon. Gentleman is plainly wrong: there has not always been a debate following conferences in Europe.
Mr. George Stevenson (Stoke-on-Trent, South): May I refer my right hon. Friend to early-day motion 94?
[That this House condemns the continued occupation of Tibet and the persistent and continuing human rights abuses perpetrated against the Tibetan people by the Chinese authorities; and calls on the Government of the People's Republic of China to enter into negotiations with the Tibetan Government-in-exile without pre-conditions to respect and preserve the cultural identity of the Tibetan people, to permit Tibetans to freely practise and express their religious beliefs, to immediately end the use of torture, beatings and arbitrary detentions and to release the eight year old boy, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, recognised by the Dalai Lama as the 11th Panchen Lama, Tibet's second highest spiritual leader.]
The early-day motion expresses concern at the continued repression and effective policy of destruction of the culture of the people of Tibet by the Chinese authorities. Allied to this is the effective kidnapping by the Chinese authorities of the 11th Panchen Lama. Given the undoubted and long-standing concerns on both sides of the House for human rights, will my right hon. Friend try to arrange a debate next week on that important issue?
Mrs. Taylor:
My hon. Friend is right to raise the issue, and I can understand why he wants time for a debate. We share the concern about human rights abuses in Tibet expressed in that motion, and we believe that a lasting
Mrs. Margaret Ewing (Moray):
While I recognise the problems faced by the Leader of the House in establishing Select Committees until events have been decided upstairs later this afternoon, may I ask her to consider urgently re-establishing the Select Committee on European Legislation, which has the authority to scrutinise all documents that come through this place, be they specifically on the common agricultural policy or the common fisheries policy or events that may occur as a result of the Amsterdam summit? That is an urgent matter that must be addressed by the House so that we can undertake that scrutiny.
Mrs. Taylor:
The hon. Lady is right to say that that is an important issue, and it is one on which we want to move as quickly as possible. She is also right to say that events later this afternoon may have a bearing on it. We have been able to provide for scrutiny of some of the documents linked to the debate that we had before the Amsterdam summit. The hon. Lady is right to say that we should move on the issue as quickly as we can.
Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West):
May I thank the shadow Leader of the House for responding to the point of order last week and reducing the number of questions that he asked--from the totally unreasonable number of 21 a fortnight ago to 16 last week, to a modest and reasonable seven today?
Will my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House arrange an early debate on the subject discussed in the pensioners parliament in Blackpool yesterday, which is the subject of early-day motion 1?
[That this House celebrates with joy and hope the election of what will be a great reforming Labour Government; applauds its manifesto declaration that 'all pensioners should share fairly in the increasing prosperity of the nation'; asserts that this can be achieved for the present generation of pensioners only by restoring the link between basic pensions and average earning; urges an immediate start to the promised manifesto review of 'all aspects of the basic pension and its value, second pensions including SERPS and community care' and a renewal of the commitment to retain SERPS.]
The motion draws attention to the need to ensure that pensioners share in the nation's increasing prosperity. We could then draw attention to the fact that, if the promise made by the previous Government in 1979 had been kept, the current basic pension would be not £62 a week, but £87 a week. Can we debate how the present Government, when they have been in power for 18 years, will be able to tell the House that they have honoured that promise?
Mrs. Taylor:
As my hon. Friend knows, a number of people share his concern about the difficulties faced by many pensioners, especially some who are on extremely low incomes and do not even claim all that they are entitled to. The National Pensioners Convention has an excellent record of championing the interests of all our older citizens. My hon. Friend will know that the
Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West):
Just over half an hour ago, the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food announced that he had not sought a timetable for the lifting of the beef ban, nor indeed was he seeking one. May we have an urgent debate on the problems facing the beef industry?
Mrs. Taylor:
The hon. Gentleman was present, and heard what my right hon. Friend the Minister said. He also knows of the difficulties created by the last Government, and knows why my right hon. Friend thought it would be foolhardy to adopt the simplistic approach that some Opposition Members seem to be adopting.
Mr. Gareth Thomas (Clwyd, West):
Will my right hon. Friend find time for a debate on how to improve the effectiveness of the Crown Prosecution Service, and in particular how to improve co-ordination between the activities of the police and those of the CPS, without undermining the independence of the CPS, in order to make inroads into the appalling statistic that only one crime in 50 results in a conviction?
Mrs. Taylor:
Perhaps I should remind my hon. Friend that Home Office questions will be tabled on Monday. He may be able to make some progress then. Although I sympathise with his concern about the problem that he has raised--many of us have dealt with constituency cases in which it has arisen--I am afraid that I cannot hold out any hope of a debate about it next week.
Mr. Robert Walter (North Dorset):
Local education authorities have been asked by circular to submit their proposals for the organisation of nursery education in their areas by 1 July. Given that those proposals would come into effect on 1 September, may I ask when we are likely to be able to debate the Government's proposals for nursery education?
Mrs. Taylor:
As the hon. Gentleman may know, the deadlines to which he refers are for the interim plans. There is a fallback scheme for authorities that will not be able to have the plans in place by September. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to ask more about this subject, he will be able to do so next Thursday at Education and Employment questions.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |