| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
- Sitting suspended, pursuant to Standing Order No. 10 (Wednesday sittings), till half-past Two o'clock.
Oral Answers to Questions
CABINET OFFICE
The Minister was asked--
Special Advisers
1. Mr. Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley): What controls there are on the number of special advisers. [96778]
The Minister for the Cabinet Office (Marjorie Mowlam): Under the terms of the ministerial code, Cabinet Ministers may each appoint up to two special advisers. All appointments require the prior written approval of the Prime Minister.
Mr. Evans: First, I congratulate the Minister on her appointment and wish her well in her new post. As a priority, will she look at the number of special advisers, which has grown dramatically under the Government, particularly in the Prime Minister's office? Under the previous Conservative Government there were eight in that office; now there are 21. Does she agree that it is inappropriate for those special advisers to take over the role formerly filled by politically neutral civil servants? Does she not think that their number and powers should be reduced? Have not a cadre of Labour placemen and spin doctors been appointed--funded by the taxpayer--so that they can spin the Labour mantra up to and including the next general election?
Marjorie Mowlam: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his welcome. I have obviously looked carefully at that issue, because this is not the first time that he has raised it. No. 10 has never hidden the number of advisers it has or the amount of money that they get paid. We made it very clear, in opposition through to taking office, that we wanted advisers in No. 10, together with Ministers, to drive policy forward. We have never denied that we wanted a central force to help to push things through. My special advisers--in Northern Ireland and in the Cabinet Office--work hand in hand with the civil service. They have different functions and different jobs, but it is useful when they work together.
Mr. Hilary Benn (Leeds, Central): I also welcome my right hon. Friend to her new post. I should perhaps declare an interest, as I am a former special adviser. Does she agree that it is about time that the Opposition recognised that, under the previous Government, special advisers worked with Ministers to help them to achieve their objectives and that the same is true of the advisers working under the current Administration? The only difference is that the current advisers are rather more effective than their predecessors.
Marjorie Mowlam: I thank my hon. Friend for his welcome. I agree that our advisers are more effective and I find the two who work with me very useful. They do not spin, as the hon. Member for Ribble Valley
(Mr. Evans) said, but do what they did for us in opposition--work on the political aspects of policy, which is not the job of many of the civil servants.
Mr. Paul Tyler (North Cornwall): I, too, welcome the Minister to her new post and I hope that it will prove to be as absorbing, though perhaps not as dangerous, as her previous one.
In answer to the hon. Member for Leeds, Central (Mr. Benn), the Minister suggested that there has been no change in the role of special advisers. Will she look again at the terms of appointment? They deliberately excluded an important criterion after May 1997. She will know that up to that date special advisers were told to avoid
Marjorie Mowlam:
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his opening remarks. I am sure that my present job will be as absorbing as my previous one; it may even be as dangerous, in some ways, as I try to work across Departments and get Ministers to co-operate. I shall certainly look at the guidelines again but, having read carefully through the code and considered what special advisers have done, I do not necessarily see any contradictions or detect any fears about the missing words, although there may be some in his mind.
Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington):
If special advisers keep Ministers in touch, let us have more. I believe that that is what the public would say as well.
Marjorie Mowlam:
There is no doubt that many of us are kept in touch when we go home to our constituencies, and kept in touch by our constituency offices. There is also no doubt that the more people we talk to and mix with who are of different political persuasions, or from different backgrounds, the better: that can only be of use.
Mr. Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire):
Let me take this opportunity to welcome not only the Minister for the Cabinet Office but the entire Cabinet Office ministerial team. I think that the entire team has changed since we last met for Cabinet Office questions. No doubt the right hon. Lady's experience at the Northern Ireland Office will help her to reconcile the warring factions in the Cabinet.
This first question is important. It is important for the right hon. Lady to show how she can root out the culture of cronyism that has found its way into Government. In particular, will she enlighten us about paragraph 48 of the ministerial code of conduct, which provides that there should be only two special advisers per Cabinet Minister? In how many Departments is that limit being breached? Will she also tell us why it is now necessary for special advisers to travel abroad with their Ministers? I am talking about 360 trips abroad, which have cost more than £500,000 in the last year.
Marjorie Mowlam:
Accusations of cronyism should be viewed in the light of what happened when the
I believe that a couple of Departments have more than two advisers. The rules permit that if it is okayed by the Prime Minister, and that has happened. I understand that the Cabinet Minister involved and the relevant permanent secretary must decide whether special advisers travel abroad. If the hon. Gentleman can give examples of cases in which that has not been agreed, I should like to know about them.
2. Shona McIsaac (Cleethorpes):
What discussions she has held with the anti-drugs co-ordinator on the use of harm-reduction approaches to tackling drug misuse. [96780]
The Minister for the Cabinet Office (Marjorie Mowlam):
I hold regular discussions with the anti-drugs co-ordinator on all aspects of our anti-drugs policy, including the use of harm reduction programmes.
Shona McIsaac:
Is my right hon. Friend aware of the case of 13-year-old Leah Lawson, a Grimsby schoolgirl who died earlier this year after purchasing £10 worth of prescribed methadone? To staunch the supply of prescribed methadone on the streets, will she and the anti-drugs co-ordinator, and any other Ministers involved, consider allowing its prescription only in small amounts, and encouraging addicts to take it only on the premises?
Marjorie Mowlam:
I am aware of the case of Leah Lawson--an appalling tragedy: the loss of another young life owing to drugs--and of the pain that losing her when she was so young will have caused her family and friends. Clinical guidelines were drawn up in April for doctors dealing with drug misuse, which recommend more supervised consumption. As for my hon. Friend's specific point about small amounts and methadone being taken on doctors' premises, I will certainly take it up with the Department of Health.
Mr. Michael Colvin (Romsey):
The right hon. Lady will have noticed that no fewer than six of the 26 questions tabled for today relate to drugs and their misuse. Given that prevention is better than cure, and given that the right hon. Lady is the Minister for joined-up government, will she have a word with the Secretary of State for Defence, in order to ensure that the defence commitment to stopping the flow of drugs into the western world--I refer to both troops on the ground and naval patrols--is not reduced? According to a report from the hon. Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr. Cohen), naval patrols in the Virgin Islands have been reduced. I think that that gives all the wrong messages to our allies in the fight against the importation of drugs. Will the right hon. Lady pass on the necessary message?
Marjorie Mowlam:
It surely comes as no surprise that six out of 26 questions should be about drugs. The issue worries every Member who notes the increase in drug use and misuse of, particularly, cocaine and heroin, which destroy lives, families and communities. No one denies that it is important.
My friend Keith Hellawell, the anti-drugs co-ordinator, who does a lot of work on drugs for the Government, last week met General McCaffrey from the United States, who was on his way back from Turkey. The work across Governments to try to stem the arrival of drugs is continuing apace. I will certainly pass the hon. Gentleman's comments to the Ministry of Defence if it has not already heard his views, but I assure him that we are already concentrating on preventing the problem by stopping drugs from entering the country in the first place.
Mr. Hilton Dawson (Lancaster and Wyre):
May I welcome my right hon. Friend to her post as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster? I trust that we can look forward to her visiting the city soon, where she will receive an extremely warm welcome.
Is my right hon. Friend aware of the pioneering work by nurses who are employed by the Morecambe Bay community NHS trust in Lancaster? It has seconded nurses to police stations to deal with people with drug problems at crucial times in their lives and at moments when interventions might prove particularly successful. That pioneering initiative received a Queen's nursing award only last week.
Marjorie Mowlam:
During my first visit to Lancaster in the early new year I look forward to meeting my hon. Friend and his colleagues, as well as others in the Duchy.
I add my congratulations to the nurses on the award that they received. It is in the police stations that the problems first come to people's notice. We have to be sure that, when young people come out of jail, there are suitable alternatives and help is given to them, so that they do not just return to drugs and go back to jail. The work in police stations by nurses, social workers, probation officers and others is crucial, as is that done on all the other fronts where we have to fight the problem. The battle is not just on one front; it is about stopping drugs coming in, doing all that we can to prevent people from starting drugs and, once they are on them, getting them off them.
Mrs. Ann Winterton (Congleton):
I, too, wish the right hon. Lady well in her new position as Minister for the Cabinet Office.
Recently, the Home Secretary announced that he wanted mandatory testing of all arrestees for drugs without first consulting those who would have to apply that test. Police officers have warned that the plan is financially and legally unrealistic. Was the Minister consulted in advance about the proposal, as one would expect from so-called joined-up government, or is it a further example of muddle and incompetence by Ministers at the Home Office?
Marjorie Mowlam:
I was not in post when the proposal was first considered; whether my predecessor was consulted, I cannot say. [Interruption.] I am sorry, but it had already been proposed because, when I read all the papers that had been given to me, it was already in them. Therefore, I was not consulted, but I am sure that my predecessor was.
"activities likely to give rise to criticism that"
they
"are being employed at public expense for purely party political purposes".
That was removed from the new letters of appointment. Will she reinstate that requirement?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |