| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
6.41 pm
Mr. Tyler: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I seek your guidance. After an hon. Member has replied for the party tabling the motion, is it not the normal practice for a Minister to reply on behalf of the Government?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: That is entirely a matter for the occupant of the Chair, and is judged on the basis of the debate and its construction. I call Sir Patrick Cormack.
Sir Patrick Cormack: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Nevertheless, I appreciate the typical timidity of the fawning hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler) in seeking to prevent my having a say after this extraordinary debate.
I slightly agreed with the hon. Member for Gordon(Mr. Bruce) when he said that the debate has not been a waste of time; in one sense, it has not. This debate has demonstrated that the Liberal Democrat party is totally unsuited to be regarded in the House as an opposition party. The right hon. Member for Chesterfield(Mr. Benn)--who made, as he always does, a very considerable parliamentary speech--is far more entitled to Opposition time than the Liberal Democrats are. If we are able to determine, through the usual channels, a way of giving one of the Opposition days to him, we should be most interested in doing so.
The hon. Member for Harrow, East (Mr. McNulty) said that he was speaking in anger rather than in sorrow. He has not only a pretty turn of phrase, but rather a low boiling point. I tell him that I am speaking far more in sorrow than in anger. Has the party of Gladstone and Lloyd George been reduced to this? It is no wonder that, today, the leader of the Liberal Democrats is not in the Chamber, and that those who are, we are told, the principal contenders for his somewhat tarnished crown also are not here.
Mr. Bob Russell (Colchester):
Hang on--I'm here!
Sir Patrick Cormack:
Ah--we have a declaration; the first hat is officially thrown into the ring. However, in common with many hon. Members on both sides of the House, I was under the impression that the right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife (Mr. Campbell) and the hon. Members for Ross, Skye and Inverness, West (Mr. Kennedy) and for Taunton (Jackie Ballard) were among the principal contenders. Where are they? It was also very noticeable that, for much of the debate, the man whom I should regard as the Liberal Democrat party's most distinguished elder statesman--the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith)--lacked the stomach to listen to the drivel that was being served up.
The Liberal Democrat opening speech really was an absolute dog's breakfast. They set themselves up to be holier than Labour and "prole-ier" than us, and try to set an example of what parliamentary democracy is all about, but they have only provided an example of how a once great party has been reduced, first to oblivion, and then to claiming triumph when managing the election of 46 hon. Members to the House. We shall certainly never seek to emulate that example.
The Liberal Democrats have lost their history, but have not yet found their place. They are grubbing around the gutters of politics, trying to get some form of power. Today's Scottish Daily Record says it all:
Over the past two years we have seen an extraordinary approach by a group of people who individually are entirely charming but who collectively are what my sergeant major in the cadet force called a proper shower. We have seen them fawning their way into a position of some little influence. In tabling this motion, giving up the opportunity for scrutiny and holding the Executive to account, they have effected the ultimate abdication.
The hon. Member for Gordon told the right hon. Member for Chesterfield that he agreed with his substantive point. So why did the Liberal Democrats not choose that or another important subject to debate? They could have done so, but instead they tried to turn petty, vindictive fire on Her Majesty's Opposition. They did so very ineffectively, trying to show that we were inconsistent and incoherent. With every word that they uttered, they demonstrated that they have a claim to any Nobel prize that is going for inconsistency and incoherence.
The Liberal Democrats are the vegans of British politics. They have an extraordinary ragbag of policies.
Mr. David Heath:
Vegans? Explain.
Sir Patrick Cormack:
They are not fit to eat the red meat of British politics. In the last Parliament they gave a new meaning to the phrase "the Sunday joint". Among their number is the hon. Member for Oxford, West and Abingdon (Dr. Harris), whose purpose in life seems to be to instal pregnancy kits in nurseries and issue condoms to toddlers. The Liberal Democrats should be laughed out of court. They do not deserve to be regarded as a serious Opposition party. In the past two and half hours they have demonstrated beyond peradventure that they are not one.
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Ms Joyce Quin):
When I first read the motion, I wondered whether it was up to the Government to comment at all. I have never seen a motion quite like it in my 12 years in Parliament, and I was reinforced in that view by the words of my right hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benn), who has been in this House for much longer.
Listening to the two opening speeches, I wondered whether I was taking part in some new form of parliamentary spectator sport. One of my colleagues suggested helpfully that I should have brought a whistle and acted as referee--although that would not have met with your approval, Mr. Deputy Speaker, since you referee our proceedings wisely. During those two speeches, I felt glad and relieved to be sitting with my colleagues on the Labour Benches.
I wondered also which Minister should respond to the debate, because the motion covers a range of topics including policing, education, the NHS and other public services. It was difficult to know how to respond to such a motion. However, there are various elements of the motion that accord with my ministerial responsibility, particularly the references to
Mr. Rowe:
Has the Minister any idea of how upset large numbers of head teachers and health trusts are by the welter of centralising documents that have come pouring out, and by the loss of initiative that they have been forced to accept in the past two years?
Ms Quin:
On the contrary, I find that people in my constituency are pleased at the amount of consultation that the Government have undertaken. On a policy for which I used to have some responsibility--the fight against crime and the local partnerships against crime--the local consultations to launch those partnerships were tremendously welcome, and people throughout the country felt that their views on those important issues were being taken into account.
"Lib Dems Cave In".
In Scotland they are catching on to the coat tails of the Labour party--as they would have liked to do in the Principality--to enjoy some little influence and power. The hon. Member for North Cornwall let the cat out of the bag when he told the hon. Member for Pendle(Mr. Prentice), who is assiduous in his attendance in this place, that the Liberal Democrats have more influence than he has. That may well be true, but whether it will give the staunch Labour supporters of the hon. Member for Pendle much comfort is another matter.
"Britain's positive role in Europe"
--something with which I strongly agree--and the importance of
"necessary reforms of the institutions and policies of the European Union", to which I attach considerable importance.
Given the nature of the motion, it is not surprising that the contributions have ranged widely and, in the10 minutes that I have left, it will be difficult to respond to many of the issues. I shall refer to one or two of the points made at the outset. I support some of the arguments made by the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath), including his strong condemnation of the centralist policies pursued in this country in the 18 years until 1997, and the importance of decentralisation, devolution and the constitutional reforms which I am proud have been undertaken by my Government.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |