| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
CHURCH COMMISSIONERS
The hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners, was asked--
Ethical Investment
36. Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham): If he will make a statement on the effectiveness of the Church Commissioners' ethical investment policy. [90236]
Mr. Stuart Bell (Second Church Estates Commissioner, representing the Church Commissioners): The Church Commissioners' ethical investment policy, which has been in operation for more than 50 years, is directed at raising standards in corporate life and encouraging business to develop codes of practice that place high standards of ethical excellence at the heart of corporate vision, thinking and strategy. While following that policy, the commissioners'
investment returns have over the past five years exceeded their financial targets and significantly outperformed the pension funds world market all-funds benchmark.
Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West): The wages of virtue.
Mr. Bercow: I am grateful for that reply. Can the hon. Gentleman assure the House that the Church Commissioners have no current investments in any country that has been severely criticised in an Amnesty International report which it has neither rebutted nor addressed? If he cannot give me and the House such an assurance, what steps are they taking to ensure that in future their hands are entirely clean?
Mr. Bell: The wages of virtue have been mentioned; they are certainly greater than the wages of sin. Labour Members, and the Church Commissioners, are happy to be on the side of the angels. I will give the hon. Gentleman a written reply on his specific question. However, the commissioners' present policy excludes about 10 per cent. of the United Kingdom stock market and a smaller proportion of world markets. To exclude a greater proportion could imbalance the portfolio, incurring increased risk as well as adversely affecting financial performance. The question of the export of defence equipment to various parts of the world is often raised. When the Prime Minister raised it and took a question about East Timor on "Question Time", he had a sandwich thrown at him. The House is a little bit more decorous in that regard and I shall give the hon. Gentleman a full response to his specific point.
Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover): I wonder whether the ethical investments of the Church of England are being more closely monitored than the ethical investments of the Tory party, which is getting drug money from Belize.
Madam Speaker: Order. That was a good try. I have stopped one question; I am stopping that one.
Cycling
37. Mr. Anthony Steen (Totnes): What the Church Commissioners' policy is as regards cycling on Church Commissioners' land. [90237]
Mr. Stuart Bell (Second Church Estates Commissioner, representing the Church Commissioners): The commissioners are always prepared to consider sympathetically requests for cycling on their land, provided that that is not detrimental to the interests of their agricultural or fishing tenants. They would also wish to take account of any nature conservation implications. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question because, from my reading of Hansard at 4 o'clock in the morning when I cannot sleep, I know that he has been asking similar questions since 1992.
Mr. Steen: Is it the policy of the Church Commissioners to refuse to allow the building of a cycle track along the banks of one of the most beautiful stretches of the River Dart between Totnes and Buckfastleigh, preferring to net whacking great profits from anglers who wish to fish there? Is that consistent with the cardinal and temporal virtues?
Mr. Bell: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for referring to the beauty of the River Dart. He will know that I have spent a considerable time on this question. There are always important wildlife habitat questions to be answered, and we must see whether habitats along the river will be disturbed and whether local hostility will be provoked. When my predecessor answered such questions in the past, he said that we should look at alternative routes. The commissioners recently approved the sale of their fishing rights along the river, but we still have no great enthusiasm for cycle paths, for the reasons that I have now given.
Orders of the Day
Railways Bill
Order for Second Reading read.
Madam Speaker:
I should inform the House that I have selected the amendment in the name of the Leader of the Opposition.
3.30 pm
The Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. John Prescott): I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
A year ago we published a new integrated policy. Ours is a transport policy, not just a policy for roads, which appears to be the policy of new Conservatism after the debate last week. Our aim is to improve choice. We want people to have greater choice, rather than a greater dependence on their cars. That means providing a better, more reliable public transport alternative.
The Bill is about providing a more punctual, reliable, accountable railway system as part of an integrated transport system. [Interruption.] The right hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood) is still making silly remarks. I should have thought that he had had enough of that this weekend.
Madam Speaker:
Order. If hon. Members wish to contribute to the debate, they should seek to catch my eye before doing so.
Mr. Prescott:
The British Railways Board and the franchising director are already working closely together as the shadow Strategic Rail Authority. The Bill is about taking the "shadow" out of the title and putting in more powers to enhance the effort already being made on behalf of passengers in developing our national railways.
The Bill meets our manifesto commitment and the policies described in our transport White Paper. It is consistent with the excellent report and recommendations of the Select Committee on the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs. The Committee's all-party report on the Strategic Rail Authority and regulation said:
Mr. Patrick McLoughlin (West Derbyshire):
The Secretary of State has just said that the Bill is in line with the recommendations of the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee. Why, then, is he using this
Mr. Prescott:
Those are the new procedures that the House has developed to provide an opportunity for Select Committees to examine Bills. As the Select Committee in this case has reported on the Bill in a most comprehensive manner, I should have thought that it would welcome the opportunity of this debate and of further examination of the Bill. The new procedure treats our Select Committees very seriously.
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich):
May I point out that my Committee not only warmly welcomes the chance to examine the Bill but believes that, because it is founded on the work that we have done, in those very few areas where we shall want to raise the odd omission we can contribute something more to the discussion?
Mr. Prescott:
I am grateful for that statement of support. If a Bill like this is presented to a Select Committee, it involves hon. Members in serious examination of legislation--sometimes much better than the examination carried out in Standing Committees. Although I may claim from the Dispatch Box that theBill is consistent with the Select Committee's recommendations, it will be better to listen to what the Committee has to say once it has examined the Bill in detail. That is right and proper, but I believe that the Bill is broadly in line with the Select Committee's recommendations.
More recently, the support that I claim exists from the industry was confirmed by the Director General of the Railways Forum, David Morphet, who said:
"We support the Government's plan for a Strategic Rail Authority as a practical way of addressing the problems of the restructured railway."
The Select Committee also said:
"The proposal for a strategic body was universally welcomed by our witnesses."
Anyone reading that report will see that the proposal was universally welcomed by the range of people who will be affected by the authority's activities. Indeed, the other day, the right hon. Member for Wokingham was arguing on the "Today" programme with a representative of a rail users consultative committee, who was advocating the establishment of a Strategic Rail Authority.
"This Bill is good news for the railways and good news for the transport industry as a whole. As well as forming the basis for a genuine strategic partnership between the Government and rail companies, it ensures Britain's railways are at last at the top of the political agenda."
I do not think that anyone could deny that.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |