| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mrs. Beckett: I anticipate that the terms of the Government motion for the debate on the common agricultural policy will be tabled later today, or certainly before the weekend, so that the House will have time to consider it.
The right hon. Gentleman asked about the Northern Ireland policing Bill. As he will have observed, it is not tabled for debate next week. The Government intend to table it when they are ready, and remain committed to doing so.
I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman is glad that we are not debating House of Lords reform today. Of course, I recognise that it is an important matter and that the House wishes to have a debate on the subject before too long, and will bear that in mind.
The right hon. Gentleman asked whether the House can be kept informed about events at Longbridge. He will be aware that it is Department of Trade and Industry questions next Thursday, which will provide an opportunity for that. On both that issue and events in Zimbabwe, the Government will endeavour to keep the House informed.
I note the right hon. Gentleman's request for a debate on the implications of any new methods of voting. It will take some time for such an evaluation to take place, but I will bear his request in mind. It might be a suitable topic for Westminster Hall.
I do not know whether I am sorry or pleased that, as far as I am aware, I have not received an e-mail saying "I love you". I understand the concerns that the right hon. Gentleman has identified. I believe that the House authorities have shut down the House's e-mail in order to protect our systems--which seems to be a swift, decisive and sensible approach. Although it is a little early to judge, it seems that part of the problem is arising from the sheer volume of e-mails that the original e-mail generates. I understand that it triggers a response to everybody on a system's address book, so it may be the volume as much as the content.
The right hon. Gentleman is right to say that, until this moment, no cure has been identified. The House authorities have taken action to protect our systems and I am sure that they and the Information Committee will want to review what is happening and its effect. The right hon. Gentleman asked me about the House systems--we are obviously anxious to protect those--as though it is primarily the House that is under attack. I do not know whether he is aware that the same phenomenon is being observed widely across the private sector and across government. Clearly, it is something to which attention will have to be turned and I am confident that the Information Committee, with the House authorities, will do so.
At present, I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman the dates for the summer recess, although I accept his point about the line of route. As always, we hope to avoid sitting in August.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): I have not received an e-mail from the Government leadership saying "I love you".
As a qualified engineer and Leader of the House, will my right hon. Friend cast a benign eye on the problems of the greatest monument to 19th century engineering anywhere in Europe, by which I mean the Forth rail bridge? It is tentatively listed as a world heritage site. As hon. Members know, particularly the hon. Member for South Staffordshire (Sir P. Cormack), world heritage sites and potential sites have to have management plans. Will my right hon. Friend ask the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, the Scottish Executive and the Scotland Office to find some way between them of establishing a management plan? Unless it is done soon, that bridge will deteriorate because of the inappropriate treatment by rigblast, which might be all right for North sea oil rigs for 25 years, but is no good for structures that have lasted 100 years and which are expected to last for another century or more. As an engineer, will my right hon. Friend cast her mind over this problem and knock heads together?
Mrs. Beckett: I understand entirely my hon. Friend's great concern and I know that his view will be widely shared, not just in the engineering community but across the United Kingdom. I will draw his remarks to the attention of the relevant Departments. I believe that consideration is being given to how proposals for the bridge can be taken forward and I know that everyone will share his anxiety to ensure that the monument is protected and preserved.
Mr. Paul Tyler (North Cornwall): Is the Leader of the House as reassured as I am by the fact that the House authorities quickly realised that any message sent to a Member of Parliament saying "I love you" would obviously cause trouble? Seriously, this is an important issue. We are grateful to the House authorities for acting as promptly as they did, but I hope that there will also soon be a report to the House to tell us what can be done to protect our systems of communication, which are extremely important in any democratic legislature.
Why, in the provisional business for the week after next, has it been decided that hot dog sellers in royal parks should take precedence in prime time over the extremely important
debate on the future of the House of Lords, which, as the right hon. Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir G. Young) said, has been postponed from today? Surely we cannot go on waiting for the Government to come off the fence and tell us what their proposals are. We all know that that will be the burden of the debate on the Wakeham report. Can we now have a firm promise that that important debate will take place before the Whitsun recess?
Mrs. Beckett: First, the House authorities may well have been swift to identify an e-mail addressed to any politician saying "I love you" as something that was not only likely to cause trouble, but was clearly not genuine. Their response was clearly triggered by a sound cynicism.
The hon. Gentleman will have heard previous exchanges about the Royal Parks (Trading) Bill, in particular involving the right hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Mr. Brooke), so he will know that it is a minor but important measure that will not only remove an inconvenience and ensure that tourists and visitors are properly protected, but prevent the unfortunate instances of violence, gang involvement and food poisoning that have happened under the present arrangements.
The question why the Bill needs half a day to be debated should be addressed to those who tabled four pages of amendments to what was previously regarded as a completely uncontroversial piece of legislation--which is, indeed, sponsored by Conservative Members. The hope and anticipation was that it would have been enacted last year, being uncontroversial, and would now be in effect. If it does not go through soon it cannot possibly take effect this summer, so there is some urgency, although of course I take the point about the importance of Lords reform.
Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington): Has my right hon. Friend any good news for me?
Mrs. Beckett: Not yet, I fear.
Mrs. Eleanor Laing (Epping Forest): Given that, at this very moment, voters all over London are struggling with an unfamiliar electoral system for electing the mayor of London, and that today's newspapers report that the Prime Minister intends to stifle debate at his own party conference on the subject of electoral reform--no doubt because he fears the honest and straightforward views of many Labour Members--will the Leader of the House undertake to make time for a debate on the subject in the near future, in this proper debating Chamber and not in Westminster Hall, so that we can hear the true views of Labour Members?
Mrs. Beckett: I would be surprised if anyone was struggling with the voting system. I do not know whether the hon. Lady has voted yet, but I have--
Mrs. Beckett: I am pleased to hear that. Having voted, I do not think that anyone would find it a struggle.
I am not aware of any proposals to stifle debate on electoral reform at the Labour party conference. Indeed, I would be very surprised if anyone was giving massive
thought at the moment--I am certainly not--to what might be debated there. I realise that the story is in the newspapers, but I am sure that the hon. Lady knows that that does not mean that it is necessarily true.
Dr. Nick Palmer (Broxtowe): Will my right hon. Friend accept my congratulations on the fact that we are fulfilling an election pledge by bringing back the Fur Farming (Prohibition) Bill? Will she also consider a debate in the reasonably near future on the continuing problems in getting compensation payments to coal miners for white finger, with an increasing number of people dying before compensation arrives? I know that the Government are very concerned about the matter, but there are still substantial delays.
Mrs. Beckett: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his remarks on a subject in which he has taken a great interest. He has also been active on the issue of white finger, as have many colleagues, especially on the Labour Benches. The compensation schemes for that affliction are now beginning to come into effect, but concern remains about some of the other schemes. However, I assure my hon. Friend that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry is working with the unions and representatives of the mining industry to get those payments through as fast as possible.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |