| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Dewar: It occurs to me that the hon. Gentleman was unwise to talk about the Trade Descriptions Act; after all, he describes himself as a Scottish Opposition spokesman. What he said was not so much a question as a rant, and he should go away and read the scheme rather more carefully. For example, he said that the Scottish Parliament would raise the council tax. But council tax is under the control of local government. If he sees that as a terrible conspiracy, he must lead a very frightened life.
The only question that the hon. Gentleman asked that seemed of much relevance was the one about Scottish Members' right to continue to vote in the House. I have
already told him, and I hope that he accepts what I say, that, if the House is sovereign, and decides to order its business, because it believes that that will increase the democratic content of British politics, by devolving some of its powers to a Scottish Parliament, that is perfectly legitimate and constitutionally proper.
I repeat that that needs to be seen in the context of a balanced package, which I believe will be widely accepted. [Interruption.] I know that the hon. Gentleman does not accept that, but it is my belief. We shall have to continue the argument on another occasion, when I hope that he will be better prepared.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Lord):
Order. That was a very--
Mr. Dennis Canavan (Falkirk, West):
On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
Points of order will come after the second statement.
The statement by the Secretary of State for Scotland was very important, and we rightly spent a considerable time on it. We must now move on to the business statement.
The President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mrs. Ann Taylor):
Madam Speaker, I would like to make a statement about the Business for next week.
Monday 28 July--Progress on remaining stages of the Finance Bill.
Tuesday 29 July--Completion of remaining stages of the Finance Bill.
Wednesday 30 July--Until 2 pm, there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House, the first of which is the three-hour general debate that precedes a recess.
Supplemental allocation of time motion relating to the Referendums (Scotland and Wales) Bill.
Consideration of any Lords amendments which may be received to the Referendums (Scotland and Wales) Bill.
Thursday 31 July--Debate on the White Paper "Scotland's Parliament", on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
The House may also be asked to consider any Lords messages which may be received.
Subject to the progress of business, it will be proposed that the House should rise for the summer Adjournment on Thursday 31 July until Monday 27 October. The provisional business for the first week back after the summer Adjournment will be as follows:
Monday 27 October and Tuesday 28 October--Debate on British defence policy on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Wednesday 29 October--Until 2 pm, there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Second Reading of the Wireless Telegraphy Bill [Lords].
Consideration of any Lords amendments which may be received to the Local Government Finance (Supplementary Credit Approvals) Bill.
Thursday 30 October--Second Reading of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission Bill [Lords].
Friday 31 October--The House will not be sitting.
The House will be aware that the Minister without Portfolio has already made it clear that he will answer questions in the House on his specific responsibilities within Government for the millennium experience at Greenwich. In order to facilitate that commitment, it is intended that after the summer recess he will have a short regular place on the rota, to answer questions on the millennium experience at the end of questions to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. That will ensure that there will be a regular opportunity to put questions on that specific topic.
May I also, Mr. Deputy Speaker, say a word about the statement made in the House yesterday? I understand that copies of Sir Ron Dearing's report were not immediately available in the Vote Office when the Secretary of State for Education and Employment made his statement. My right hon. Friend had ensured that copies of the 54-page summary of the report were available to Members, and that copies of the full report were placed in the Library.
In addition, a pamphlet summarising the main recommendations and the Government's plans for the future was sent to all hon. Members.
However, given the huge interest in the matter, copies of the full report were placed in the Vote Office shortly after the end of the statement. I think that those should have been available from the beginning of the statement, and I regret any inconvenience caused to Members.
Mrs. Gillian Shephard (South-West Norfolk):
I thank the right hon. Lady for her statement. She could not better have illustrated her Government's disdain for the parliamentary process, nor their inability to manage their own legislative programme, than by her breathtaking announcement that she plans to keep the House in recess until the end of October--simply, I assume, because she and her colleagues are too incompetent to organise their own business.
It is curious that the right hon. Lady has combined that announcement with the fact that, between now and the end of the Session, she intends to introduce the third guillotine in eight weeks. I hope that she will be able to explain to the House the consequences of that particular incompetence for the rest of the parliamentary year.
However, I am sure that we are all delighted to know that the Minister without Portfolio will be explaining his plans for the dome. That is indeed something to which we will all look forward. Perhaps we could even come back early for the pleasure.
Sadly, last week I had to remind the right hon. Lady of her responsibilities to the whole House. It is now clear that the Government's spin doctor machine operates entirely independently of her. Even if she wished to involve the House in announcements and in changes in policy, and to protect its interests and those of all hon. Members, it is clear that she has not the power to do so.
Nevertheless, will the Leader of the House belatedly arrange for a debate next week on the new Cabinet consultative committee to be chaired by the Prime Minister and to include Liberal Democrat Members, the establishment of which was announced on Tuesday to the press but not to this House? Will she ensure that such a debate addresses the concerns of the right hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benn)--who is in his place--who correctly pointed out that such an arrangement should be announced to the House so that its implications can be examined?
In particular, does membership of such a committee mean that the Liberal Democrats can continue to enjoy the rights of Opposition parties? Can a Liberal Democrat spokesman ask questions with knowledge acquired from the Government that he cannot disclose to the House?
Will the Leader of the House confirm that, according to his reply yesterday to the right hon. Member for Chesterfield, the Prime Minister's criterion for policy change is:
Can we have an early debate on the Dearing report? Would the Leader of the House point out to the House the reference in her party's manifesto which lays out the
Government's intention--using the Secretary of State's own costings--to charge all higher education students £10,000 for their university education? Will she explain how such an intention accords with the sentiment in her party's manifesto--to make higher education more accessible for all students?
Can we have a debate next week on the Government's plans to introduce a national minimum wage? Will the Leader of the House confirm that the President of the Board of Trade intends to propose legislation before advice on the level of the wage is received from the Low Pay Commission--despite promises to the contrary in Labour's manifesto, its business manifesto, its small business document, its industry policy paper and countless statements from Labour Members, including the Prime Minister?
When can we expect the Foreign Secretary to come to the House to make a statement on the outcome of the review of defence exports and, in particular, on whether sales of jets to Indonesia continue?
Finally, when does the Leader of the House intend to publish the report of the Select Committee on the Modernisation of the House of Commons?
Mrs. Taylor:
The right hon. Member for South-West Norfolk (Mrs. Shephard) asked first about the length of the recess, and she will not be surprised to learn that I have checked what has happened in previous years. The length of the recess on this occasion is no different from the length of the first summer recess after the 1992 general election, which her party won. It is not an unusual length of recess. We have done a remarkable amount in the first three months of this Parliament--perhaps more than has been done before in such a period. We have introduced 18 Bills and we expect six Bills to receive Royal Assent before the summer recess. We have also published White Papers and made statements in the House on four separate issues.
A lot has been achieved, but I make no secret of the fact that, following a change of Government, there is not the usual length of time to draft new legislation. There is still a long way to go in terms of the drafting work which would normally take place on an on-going basis but, in this instance, could not start until May of this year. I make no promises about the length of the recess on other occasions.
My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister dealt with the issue of the Cabinet committee yesterday, and said that the membership of it--once decided--would be announced to the House. I should remind the right hon. Member for South-West Norfolk that on the very same day that the Cabinet committee was announced, the Liberal Democrats--not the Conservative party--opposed us in the lobbies on the Social Security Bill. We should not draw too many implications from the creation of the committee.
The right hon. Member for South-West Norfolk referred to the Dearing report, published yesterday, which she called for when she was the Secretary of State for Education. We have been interested in the amount of support that we have received from Conservative Members--particularly those who were Education Ministers. There is a case for debating that report, but I am not sure whether we can find time for such a debate when we come back. The Select Committee on Education
and Employment--or the Conservative party--may decide to make inquiries and call for a debate on the matter.
4.53 pm
"I say that if it is the right thing to do, why not do it?"--[Official Report, 23 July 1997; Vol. 298, c. 943.]
Will she explain how such an attitude accords with parliamentary democracy?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |