| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mrs. Taylor: The previous Government made such proposals. My hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, who has responsibility for Customs officers, has been concerned about the possible impact of those cuts. I have talked to Customs officers about their drug-related work and we attach great importance to that. We will have to await the outcome of further discussions, but I hope that we do not have to wait too long before a decision can be announced.
Mr. Malcolm Bruce (Gordon): Will not the Leader of the House acknowledge that she is rather missing the point on the compressed timetable for the Finance Bill? The problem is not that she is not providing enough sittings in the House but that she is making a fundamental mistake: she is on the record as saying that the Bill is effectively a minor measure implementing the Labour party's manifesto commitments, whereas in fact it contains major proposals that were not in the manifesto and have considerable implications that, as Government Members' confusion shows, are not fully understood even by them. It is not possible for those affected to marshal the arguments between now and the end of the month.
Mrs. Taylor: I believe that many people have marshalled the arguments. People who operate in the sector are well able to work quickly. I did not say that the Bill had no major proposals--every Finance Bill will probably contain major proposals--but I said that it was half the size of the previous Finance Bill. I thank the hon. Gentleman for saying that we are allowing enough sittings on the Bill.
Mr. Andrew Love (Edmonton): Will my right hon. Friend find time to debate early-day motion 96?
[That this House notes the considerable pressure being applied to the Nationwide Building Society which is committed to remaining mutual to become a bank; further notes that this would threaten homeowners with higher mortgage interest rates and savers with lower interest rates; and calls for the mutual status of building societies to be respected and maintained to ensure that homeowners and savers have more choice.]
The motion concerns building societies and the future of the financial services sector. Building societies are under threat. Despite previous demutualisations, the existing building societies are committed to their current status. Mutuality brings stability, not to mention choice, diversity and much-needed competition, to the financial services sector. The matter is urgent and I hope that my right hon. Friend will be able to give us some time to discuss the implications for the health of the financial services sector.
Mrs. Taylor:
I am aware that some people are concerned about developments in the area. We recently had an
Mr. William Thompson (West Tyrone):
The Leader of the House will be aware that there are motions on the Order Paper concerning the setting up of Committees of the House. When might they come up for consideration, and does she have any role in the composition of Committees? An examination of the names suggests that the Government have seven members on the Select Committees, and the Opposition four, which means that small parties such as the Ulster Unionist party are poorly represented. Will the right hon. Lady consider our objections?
Mrs. Taylor:
The Committee of Selection made its nominations yesterday for a number of Select Committees. Those stand on the Order Paper and will be considered in due course. The composition of those Select Committees has been determined on a ratio, as is normally the case. There is nothing exceptional about the balance. Indeed, on several Committees the Government have, quite exceptionally, offered extra places on occasions, to ensure the best possible representation. If the hon. Gentleman has any other problems, he should take the matter up with the Chief Whip of the minority parties, who deals with such negotiations.
Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley):
Has my right hon. Friend heard the good news that the Germans have committed themselves to the Eurofighter? That is good news not only for Chorley but for the rest of the country, as it will safeguard 32,000 jobs. When can we expect a general debate on defence?
Mrs. Taylor:
I know that my hon. Friend had a useful debate on the issue yesterday. It is slightly premature to say that the Germans have committed themselves formally to the Eurofighter, but the indications are positive. I am sure that he was pleased that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence said yesterday that the Government were committed to the purchase of 232 Eurofighters. I am afraid that it will not be possible to have a more general debate before the recess, but I said last week that I hoped that we could have a defence debate before too long, and I hope that we will do that when we return in the autumn.
Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex):
Will the right hon. Lady reconsider an application that I made to her last week for a debate on the Budget leak that was so widely discussed in the Sunday newspapers? Opposition Members understand that there is always speculation about Budgets, but does she agree that it is plain--and everyone knows it--that there was a leak? Will she therefore assure the House that, instead of the frivolous answers given by the Prime Minister, there will be a serious inquiry into what is an extremely serious matter?
Mrs. Taylor:
I do not think that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister was frivolous. I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's basic proposition that there was a leak. As he said, there is always speculation about Budgets.
Mr. Paul Burstow (Sutton and Cheam):
Will the right hon. Lady find time next week for a statement on the
Mrs. Taylor:
We all know that the funding of community care has always been a problem, both for local authorities and the Government, but I am afraid that I cannot hold out much prospect of a debate or statement. It would not be helpful to comment on a private Member's Bill in another place.
Mr. Mike Hancock (Portsmouth, South):
I am very grateful, Madam Speaker, for your patience in getting this far. I should be grateful if the Leader of the House could persuade her ministerial colleagues responsible for housing to table a motion before the recess in Government time to do something about the housing crisis faced by the nation and, in particular, by the city of Portsmouth, which I represent. Despite the fact that it has sold council houses and amassed a £50 million fortune, it is getting less than £1 million to tackle the serious issues that we face in a city where the housing situation is no better than it was 25 years ago when I entered local government there.
Mrs. Taylor:
The whole House knows that we inherited many housing problems, but it also knows that we are very short of time before the recess. I cannot therefore hold out any prospect of the debate that the hon. Gentleman wants. We have, of course, made progress on the Bill to release capital receipts, which will be widely welcomed.
Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire):
Is it not mildly ironic that when the House should be debating the timetable motion, the Select Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons is supposed to be sitting upstairs? What really is the point of hon. Members giving their time and effort to try to modernise our procedures if the right hon. Lady anticipates things, rides roughshod over the House and gives the old meaning to the word "transparency"--that one can see through her?
Mrs. Taylor:
If the Select Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons makes progress, we may not need so many guillotines in future.
Mr. David Heathcoat-Amory (Wells):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. In answer to one of my hon. Friends, the Leader of the House said that we had not selected dividend tax credit abolition as a subject for debate on the Floor in Committee. If she were more familiar with the Bill that she is attempting to ram through the House, she would know that clause 19 deals with that subject and that we asked for it to be debated. In case she misled the House--inadvertently, I am sure--will she take this opportunity to correct herself?
The President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mrs. Ann Taylor):
Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. I was asked about advance corporation tax. I was not aware that that was one of the issues on which a debate had been requested. [Hon. Members: "They are the same thing."] If I was wrong, I apologise, but I thought that ACT and dividend tax credits were two aspects of a different problem.
4.33 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |