| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mrs. Taylor: First, I welcome the right hon. Member for South-West Norfolk (Mrs. Shephard) to her position
as shadow Leader of the House, and I welcome also the hon. Member for South Staffordshire(Sir P. Cormack) to his position as her deputy.
On the Budget debate, I am pleased that we were able to accommodate the representations that were made. We have suggested that the debate should take place on what would have been a non-sitting Friday. It will be a non-voting day, and that will be for the convenience of hon. Members who may wish to speak in the debate, but who are not necessarily worried about speaking on the day on which we vote. We intend to reinstate the non-sitting Friday, and we will consult on that in due course.
In respect of the shadow Leader's comments on Labour Members and the referendums, there is no need for a debate on this matter next week. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made the position perfectly clear yesterday, when he said that hon. Members were perfectly entitled to speak their mind. That remains the case.
So far as the hon. Members for Glasgow, Govan (Mr. Sarwar) and for Liverpool, West Derby (Mr. Wareing) are concerned, they remain Members of Parliament, and are entitled to use the facilities of this House. They have been suspended from the parliamentary Labour party--which is not a matter for this House--and have been reported to the Parliamentary Commissioner because of the allegations that have been made. The custom, and the insistence of the Parliamentary Commissioner, is that there should be no discussion of cases under review.
Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham):
What about Neil Hamilton?
Mrs. Taylor:
The right hon. and learned Gentleman refers to a certain ex-Member of this House. He will find it very difficult to find anything that I said about that case when I was a Back Bencher. Conservative Members ought to obey the rules of this House, and help to make our system of standards and privileges work. They should stand by the Parliamentary Commissioner and the new system that we have instigated. If Conservative Members want a debate on how we govern ourselves and rule out sleaze, we should be willing to look at that in due course.
As for the tax-raising powers of a Scottish Parliament, I think that the only confusion existed in the newspapers yesterday. There is no change whatsoever in the situation. I can confirm that the White Paper will be published next month, and my right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Scotland have made clear that there will be a debate on it.
Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North):
As someone who never allows himself to be gagged under any circumstances, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether we can have a statement next week on the pressures that were applied to stop the Princess of Wales attending a meeting yesterday on land mines--a humanitarian subject which is certainly not a party political matter? Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in today's The Daily Telegraph, the former Conservative Cabinet Minister Lord Deedes said that Conservative Members were totally wrong to stop the Princess coming here?
Mrs. Taylor:
The Government are not responsible for who attends meetings in Westminster, but I agree that this
Mr. Paul Tyler (North Cornwall):
On behalf of my Liberal Democrat colleagues, I warmly welcome the Government's second thoughts on the arrangements for the Budget debate. We are grateful. May I draw attention to the difficulty that would have been caused--I hope that it will not happen in future--by having very important Divisions late on a Thursday evening for hon. Members with far-flung constituencies? [Hon. Members: "Shame."]
May I also draw the right hon. Lady's attention to the fact that, under the Jopling proposals, it was the plan--I thought that it was agreed on both sides of the House--that, on Thursdays before non-sitting Fridays, there would not be late votes. In future, will she be able to give us advance notice of non-sitting constituency Fridays, as they are important for the planning of Members' diaries?
Finally, is it true that the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is this afternoon meeting the directors of McDonald's to impress on them the importance of renewing the sourcing of their products from British beef producers? If so, and if he is not successful in those representations, can we have an early statement and debate so that we can impress on McDonald's and the other burger chains what damage they have done to British industry--to the farming industry in particular, but not exclusively--so that they can at long last apologise for the damage done, and perhaps eat humble pie?
Mrs. Taylor:
With regard to what the hon. Gentleman said about the Budget, the expanded debate is partly the result of pressures and partly because we were reluctant to have votes late on a Thursday night when there could have been a succession of votes. Despite the comments of Conservative Members, it is a good principle that we should try to avoid a succession of votes late on a Thursday whenever possible. Clearly, it will not always be possible, but if we can avoid it, we should. There will, however, be pressures on time in July, and we want to discuss how we can best deal with them through the usual channels. I hope that we can get some agreement there.
On the hon. Gentleman's remarks about my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and his meeting with McDonald's, I can confirm that that meeting has taken place. I believe that significant progress was made, and that McDonald's will make a statement later in the day. The fact that we have got to this stage shows how successful the new Ministers have been in turning around a difficult situation.
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich):
Will the Leader of the House try to find time for a debate on channel tunnel safety as soon as possible? She will have noticed the questions on the Order Paper relating to a number of incidents disclosed by the Channel Tunnel Safety Authority, which make it clear that there is consistent over-running, incidents such as doors falling off trains without being noticed, as well as a number of other questions that ought to be raised on the Floor of the House as rapidly as possible.
Mrs. Taylor:
I am aware of my hon. Friend's long-term concern about those issues. I am not sure that
Sir Peter Emery (East Devon):
Will the right hon. Lady tell the House why the Government have allowed a press release to be issued by a Government Department--by a Minister--carrying private advertising and the logos of a private company in colour? Surely that is very nearly approaching sleaze. It ought to be stopped, because it is Government money, not private money. Will she investigate that matter, and ensure that it is stopped and that a statement is issued about it next week?
Mrs. Taylor:
I do not know exactly what the right hon. Gentleman is referring to, but I doubt if anything of that sort is unprecedented.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow):
Will my right hon. Friend consider a short statement next week, giving some explanation as to why it should take the Home Office and the Metropolitan police until the end of September to come to a conclusion on the tragic murder of one of their own--Woman Police Constable Yvonne Fletcher? Is it not extraordinary that the conventional view is against the evidence of the senior ballistics expert of the British Army, George Styles, the evidence given by Hugh Thomas, the consultant surgeon in Belfast, and the professional evidence of probably the most distinguished Home Office pathologist this century, Bernard Knight, who was put in charge at Cromwell street? Is that not a matter of some urgency?
Mrs. Taylor:
My hon. Friend raised that matter with my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on Tuesday. As my right hon. Friend said, the case remains open and the Metropolitan police will of course consider any new evidence. On the delay, it is important that any examination of evidence should be thorough. I do not think that we can find time for a debate on the subject in the near future.
Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham):
Will the Leader of the House reconsider her decision not to allow us a debate next week on Members of Parliament being able to speak their mind on, for example, devolution, without the threat of expulsion from the parliamentary party? She will have heard what both the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) and the Secretary of State for Wales said yesterday; there is a clear distinction, so they cannot both be right, and there cannot be an innocent explanation for the one who is wrong.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |