| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst): Where is he?
Sir George Young: Will not such reductions as were announced by the Chancellor on 9 March be wiped out by town halls on 1 April, leaving people to face the increases announced by the Chancellor is his previous Budgets?
Mrs. Beckett: I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his courteous remarks about our giving further notice. He is entirely right that there is a new structure for defence debates, following discussions through the usual channels which involved the Select Committee. I think the whole House will feel that that is a better structure for debates.
Through those same channels, we will consider his suggestion that the debate on Thursday week should be on personnel. It had been envisaged that it would be on defence in the world, because it was thought that it might be preferable for the House to begin this new pattern by discussing the strategic approach, but we will discuss those matters through the usual channels. We will do the same in respect of the right hon. Gentleman's proposal that we should look again at the arrangements for discussing public expenditure, although I took advantage of his raising that issue, on the last occasion when I answered business questions, to remind him of the record of the previous Government on this matter. I did not intend by doing so to suggest that this Government are not much more sensible and reasonable.
The right hon. Gentleman asked about any oral statements following the Budget. We hope and envisage that, today, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment will be able to flesh out during the debate some of the matters in his area of responsibility. We hope that there will be oral statements next week--on Monday, from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health, and on Tuesday, from my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. I hope that it is helpful to the House to have advance notice of what the Government envisage for next week.
The right hon. Gentleman asked me about debates on the Macpherson report, the national changeover plan, the White Paper on Lords reform and care of the elderly. He described those matters as a growing backlog. I accept that we have not yet found time for full debates on them, but he will recognise that all those reports have been published only in the recent past. I certainly expect to try to find time for a debate on the Macpherson report--I hope in the not-too-distant future--and we have not yet finished dealing with the legislation on Lords reform. I have that, and the other issues that the right hon. Gentleman raised, very much in mind. Again, we can discuss those issues through the usual channels.
For the benefit of someone at the back of the Chamber who clearly was not listening to the "Today" programme, may I say that my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister is in Bombay at present? I envisage that my right hon. Friend will indeed address the issue of council taxes, although the right hon. Gentleman will know that the survey that was published today is a preliminary survey and that, in many cases, those matters are not settled.
Mr. Jimmy Hood (Clydesdale):
May I remind my right hon. Friend of the steps that the Government are taking to promote family-friendly employment? It might help that cause if we debated what is currently happening in the House of Commons, and the contracts that have been imposed on some staff--in particular, some part-time staff who work 28 hours a week serving tea, buns, cakes and bacon rolls to Members of Parliament. I understand that they have been told that they must work for 11 hours before they can be paid overtime. We do not have many all-night sittings nowadays, but they are still a possibility, and in the event of such a sitting, members of staff might
Mrs. Beckett:
I cannot promise time for a debate in the near future, but I was not aware of the issues raised by my hon. Friend, and I shall make inquiries--as, no doubt, will other hon. Members.
Mr. Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove):
May I join my--I am sorry, Madam Speaker. [Hon. Members: "You've started well."] I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the dates for the Easter recess: that is very helpful to Members.
May I draw the right hon. Lady's attention to early-day motion 413, which is, a prayer against the social security and child benefit regulations? It asks
[That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty praying that the draft Social Security and Child Benefit (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 1999, which were laid before this House on 4th March, be not made.]
The motion refers to a proposal to replace appeal tribunals by what I can only describe as "uni-unals", consisting of just one member. The proposal worries many Members, and it certainly worries a number of people facing appeals--a prospect that is already daunting enough for many.
The Chancellor promised us a number of statements. Will the right hon. Lady find time for a statement that he failed to promise--a statement about a renewables review? Such a statement would be very relevant to the Chancellor's proposals for an energy tax, and other environmental measures. The subject is clearly missing from the Government's current programme; it appears to be stuck in the system.
Mr. Stunell:
Finally, let me say this. [Hon. Members: "Oh, no."] I may have started slowly, but I will finish quickly.
On Monday, the Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport will visit Manchester to examine some of the facilities for the Commonwealth games that will take place in 2002. Will the Leader of the House find an opportunity for a Minister to make a statement of support for a project that could bring benefits not just to the north-west but to the United Kingdom as a whole?
Mrs. Beckett:
I cannot tell the hon. Gentleman that we will try to find time for a debate on the form that tribunals should take, but he can raise the matter through the usual channels. I shall inform my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister of the hon. Gentleman's expressed wish for a renewables review, but I suspect that hon. Members will have opportunities to raise the issue, not least during debates on the Budget.
I take on board what the hon. Gentleman said about Manchester. I think the whole House supports Manchester's case, and I am glad to learn that the Select Committee is going there to see for itself. I shall bear the matter in mind, because it is of general interest and also in view of the hon. Gentleman's suggestion that it could be aired in the Chamber.
Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover):
Is my right hon. Friend aware of what was said this morning on the BBC
May we have a statement--or, better still, will my right hon. Friend get in touch with Departments that are responsible for such matters, to ensure that the top banks sort this out?
Mrs. Beckett:
I believe that Members on both sides of the House will share my hon. Friend's concern that these matters are not being resolved. The subject may have been mentioned in yesterday's debate. We all want to see the highest possible standards of consumer service. I say to my hon. Friend, however, that if anyone is willing to transfer money into someone else's account, mine is available.
Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West):
Can the right hon. Lady ensure that on Monday, in the winding-up speeches, her right hon. Friend the Chancellor deals with the issue that was raised on Budget day by her hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury and Atcham (Mr. Marsden) in a petition in respect of excise duty on diesel? Will he address the fact that we now stand to suffer greater pollution as vehicles fill up in France on lower-grade diesel to avoid the highest diesel prices in the world, which now pertain in this country?
Mrs. Beckett:
As the whole House must be aware, there will be ample opportunity to air those matters during the Budget debate. I cannot give the hon. Gentleman an undertaking as to what matters my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will include in his winding-up speech, as obviously he will be trying to summarise several days of debate, but I shall draw the hon. Gentleman's concerns to his attention.
Mr. David Chaytor (Bury, North):
May I draw my right hon. Friend's attention to the publication this week of the Government's biodiversity action plan, a long-awaited document that is part of our international treaty obligations? Does she share my concern that, as of 12.25 pm today, that document was not available in the Vote Office or the Library? Does she agree that it is an important part of our environmental policy? In view of increasing public concern about the implications for biodiversity of genetically modified foods and our conformity with the requirements of the Kyoto protocol, will she make every effort to ensure that, at the very least, there is a statement on the biodiversity action plan next week?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |