| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mrs. Taylor: Conservative Members would have been very critical if we had gone back on manifesto commitments, and so would the country as a whole. There has been no change in this Government's policy on some of the matters to which the hon. Gentleman refers. The fact that we disagree with the previous Government on a range of issues does not mean that we have to explain why.
Mr. James Clappison (Hertsmere): In reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow), the Leader of the House said that she took the trouble on 3 July to tell the House that the Minister for Trade and Competitiveness in Europe was in the process of complying with the requirements affecting him as a Minister regarding shareholdings. Has he now done so?
Mrs. Taylor: If the Permanent Secretary and the Cabinet Secretary are satisfied with the arrangements that have been made, I do not think there is any need to take the matter further.
Mr. Nick St. Aubyn (Guildford): May we have an urgent statement by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury in view of the fact that, during last night's debate on clause 17 of the Finance Bill, she, no doubt unintentionally, misled the House? The effects of clause 17 on some important classes of insurance premium payers, of whom there are certainly tens of thousands, and possibly hundreds of thousands, will be dramatic. It was clear that Conservative Members were very worried, but, towards the end of that debate, the Financial Secretary assured us that the answers to our questions would be
found in the notes from the Inland Revenue. We have checked those notes, but there is absolutely nothing in them to clarify the issue. May we therefore please have a statement?
Mrs. Taylor: I do not know of any reason why we should have a statement. If the hon. Gentleman is concerned, there are still several stages of the Bill left--the remainder of the Committee stage, and Report--so there will be other opportunities for him to raise the matter with Treasury Ministers.
Mr. Tim Collins (Westmorland and Lonsdale): Before the House rises, will the Leader of the House make time for a statement, if not a debate, on the outcome of the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions' accelerated roads review? She will know that many Members from all parts of the House are very concerned on behalf of their constituents about the outcome of that review. I hope that she will ask her colleagues to make a statement, rather than issue yet another significant policy development as a press release.
Mrs. Taylor: I am afraid that I cannot tell the hon. Gentleman when that review will be complete, but we appreciate the need to keep the House informed.
Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West): Notwithstanding the answer that the right hon. Lady gave to my right hon. Friend the shadow Leader of the House, we did have a debate early in this Parliament on the salary of one of the Law Officers in another place, and great sport it afforded, especially when contrasted with the salary available for the Minister for Women. Will the right hon. Lady reconsider and arrange a debate on the palatial accommodation of the Lord Chancellor? Perhaps we could contrast that with the treatment of our own barber who, although he has no international reputation and does not travel abroad, is an honest, decent, working fellow.
Mrs. Taylor: I think it best just to say that I have nothing to add to the answer that I gave earlier.
Mr. Robert Walter (North Dorset): In the past month, the Prime Minister has negotiated the Amsterdam treaty, the President of the Commission has introduced his Agenda 2000, laying out spending proposals for well into the next century and the Commission has produced its proposals for bringing six new members into the European Union. When are we likely to be able to debate the future structure, financing and shape of the European Union?
Mrs. Taylor: There is clearly no prospect of such a debate in the immediate future. There will have to be debates and legislation following Amsterdam, when there will be opportunities to discuss those issues.
Mr. Leigh : On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Could you assist me by directing me to the passage in "Erskine May" that states that because a proposal is contained in a party document--a manifesto--it does not have to be shared with the House of Commons? You may answer that you are not responsible for what statements the Government bring to the House. As the pensions review relates to terms of reference and as we cannot
question the Government on it, I wonder whether you might elucidate further and better particulars with the Government on our behalf.
Madam Speaker: The hon. Gentleman is raising a point of order in relation to many questions that have already been put to the Leader of the House. Let me make my position as Speaker quite clear. I expect any Government, when there is a change of policy to be announced, to announce it in the House, preferably from the Dispatch Box, so that that policy can be questioned. That can also be done by means of a written question, which happened on a number of occasions with previous Governments. Only when there is a change of policy must the House be kept informed.
The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day. [Interruption.] I think that that was a big raspberry to many Members.
Orders of the Day
CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Question, That the Bill be now read a Second time, put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 56 (Consolidated Fund Bills), and agreed to.
Question, That the Bill be now read the Third time, put forthwith, and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.
The Minister for Local Government and Housing (Ms Hilary Armstrong):
I beg to move,
Before referring to the order and the caps proposed for Oxfordshire, Somerset and Warwickshire, I should like to make a few general points about the Government's view of the role of local government.
We believe that local government has an important part to play in Britain's future. Our policies will be based on our wish to reinvigorate local government, outlinedin our manifesto. Those policies encourage increased democracy, with local people having the chance to have more of a say in the affairs of their council; increased autonomy, with more freedom for authorities to take their own decisions; increased accountability, with elected representatives being more visibly accountable for their actions; and increased partnership between central and local government and between local authorities and the people they serve and businesses and groups in their areas.
Only yesterday, the first meeting of the new central-local partnership took place, chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister and attended by several Cabinet Ministers and representatives from local government, to consider major local government issues, including the pressures on local government and the policies that we want to take forward with it. We believe that within that framework, local authorities have important roles as commissioners and deliverers of a wide range of local services.
The announcement in the Budget of an additional £1 billion for education next year is a clear example of our commitment to help local authorities in the all-important area of education. The increase will allow local education authorities to plan ahead over the next 18 months.
In the longer term, we are committed to abolishing crude capping. We cannot do so, however, until we have put in place other policies on local accountability, such as best value and local performance plans. In the meantime, we must settle the 1997-98 capping round in a way that is consistent with our undertaking to live within existing public expenditure plans.
Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire):
There may be a number of Labour Members who are not entirely happy about the rate capping provisions and who are interested in the interpretation of manifesto and policy commitments, with which my hon. Friend has been dealing in connection with the position on rate capping. Once the order goes through, will that be the limit of the rate capping policy? If not, will the Government at least consider a rate capping policy that will be limited, in the way that it operates for Oxfordshire, Somerset and Warwickshire?
Ms Armstrong:
My hon. Friend is right. We have a firm commitment in the manifesto, as I have just said. The Chancellor announced in his Budget, at the same time as providing substantial additional resources for education in the next year, that there would have to be a continuing 4.7 pm
That the draft Council Tax Limitation (England) (Maximum Amounts) Order 1997, which was laid before this House on 14th July, be approved.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |